Princeton Theological Seminary-Speer -X f ?! , g s . J .) < Xf / * 'Jht . X L1B R A R Y or THK wmmmsL mmm< PRDCETOlf, W. J. DONATION OF S A M U EL A Gr NEW, 0 F l> U HAl) li L P HI A, P A . Letter L 3 No. f 18 BT 1101 B52 1832 Blake, John Lauris, 1788- 1857 . Conversations on the evidences of Christianity I l 4 X , • X * • ; .- : w * .# - .‘uu I. Ji* xi. CONVERSATIONS # ON THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY: . - f IN WHICH THE LEADING ARGUMENTS OP THE BEST AUTHORS Ufa w, ARE ARRANGED, DEVELOPED, AND CONNECTED WITH EACH OTHER. ADAPTED TO THE USE OP SCHOOLS AND FAMILIES. BY REV. J. V. BLAKE, A. M. BOSTON CARTER, HENDEE, AND CO. 1832 , Entered according to Act of Congress , in the year 1832 , By Carter, Hendee, fy Co. in the Clerk’s Office of the District Court of Massachusetts. 4 PREFACE. A painful apprehension has been indulged, within the last few years, lest, in the great zeal for improvement in common elementary education, the subject of religion should be too much neglect¬ ed. Is not this the melancholly fact ? Let an ex¬ amination be made, and what will be the result! Look at the mass of our primary schools, and of our grammar schools, and see how little is embrac¬ ed in the whole range of instruction there given, that would indicate us to be a Christian people. It is true, that "in many of our school books allu¬ sions may be often made to the gospel, and indeed to some of its distinctive characteristics; but, are these characteristics themselves exhibited in a manner to enlighten the understanding, to con¬ solidate the views, and to invigorate the hopes of the professed disciples of Jesus Christ! It is be¬ lieved not. They are allusions merely that would scarcely disturb the faith of an enlightened Bra- min or Mahometan. Is it not owing to such a deficiency in our sys¬ tems of education, that so many youth are grow , 4 PREFACE. ing up flippant sceptics on the subject of religion; and, are casting away with insolent rudeness and scorn the faith and hope of their pious parents?' No one of extensive observation can deny it is so. Only a few years since, in one of the Sunday Schools of this city, an intelligent Miss of fourteen disputed with her Teacher the truth of Christiani¬ ty. It soon appeared that the former was familiar with the writings of Paine and other infidels; and, yet she was the daughter of Christian parents. It seems that a moral poison had been administer¬ ed to her ; yet, no one at home, or at school had furnished her with an antidote! The poison sank deep into the soul; and, were it proper so soon after and in the very place of a sad catastrophe, to detail the subsequent history of one so young, and beautiful, and of respectable connexions, and in a high degree intellectual, it would address itself to a Christian community with a force seldom real¬ ized. If we would secure the children and youth of our country against the deleterious influence which is cast over them by the enemies of Christianity, we must furnish them with means at their own houses, in the Sunday School, and in the various literary Institutions to which they have access, to become familiarly acquainted with the principles of our most holy faith. No one should be permit¬ ted to grow up without these means. The subject should be continually in view; and, in a manner calculated to awaken all the sensibilities of the PREFACE. 5 youthful heart. The youthful intellect should be habitually disciplined to the comprehension of these principles in their several relations, as it is disciplined to the attainment of science. To assist in a labour so necessary for the futurewell being of our country, independent of its effects on individ¬ ual happiness, the editor of the following work is induced to present it to the public. The main por¬ tion of it is from the well known press of Long¬ man, Rees, Orme, Brown, and Green, to whom we are under the greatest obligation for a series of ; works, in the form here assumed, on education. Indeed, it might seem that this Compend on the Evidences of Christianity should ever be a com¬ panion for the Conversations on Chemistry, Nat¬ ural Philosophy, Political Economy, and Botany ; and, even for elementary works generally on lit¬ erature and science. It is, however to dependun jparents and teachers to say whether it shall be¬ come thus useful in rearing up the coming gene¬ ration. The form of Conversations, under which the subject is here presented, is not that which the author regards as the best which could be adopted, neither is the proof developed to that extent which it would bear; and in many other particulars con¬ nected with the subject, additions nf greater or less importance might with propriety have been made, had the present work been intended, as a complete and systematic view of all that could be adduced in behalf of Christianity. The object, 6 PREFACE however, of the author was to be read by those who cannot or will not read the works of abler men. That form, therefore, was adopted which experience has shown most likely to succeed, and the argument developed to that extent only which the limits of a small and elementary work per¬ mitted. Boston , August 14, 1832. CONVERSATIONS ON THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY CONVERSATION I. Maria. My brother and myself have a favour to re¬ quest of you, my dear father, which we hope you will not deny us, though we have some hesitation in asking it. Mr. B. The sooner I hear it, the better. You may be sure, that nothing short of necessity will occasion a refusal. „ Edward. Our hopes and fears alike arise from the na¬ ture of our petition. We are very desirous of learning from you, in conversation, the evidences for the Chris¬ tian religion. Mr. B. This is, indeed, more than I expected; and I might answer, that, like yourselves, I am influenced in two ways; the importance of the subject putting it out of my power to refuse, at the same time thatit makes me hesitate in ’acceding to your wishes. Maria. We feel grateful for the first part of your an¬ swer, which the second only teaches us to value more. Edward. We are, indeed, aware, that it is no slight task we impose upon you, my dear father; but we have long been anxious upon the subject, on that account. Mr. B. You have, then, considered the subject, in 1 What request does Edward make to his father ?—2 In What two ways is Mr. B. influenced in relation to this request'll—3 What question does he ask Edward and Maria, as to their understanding the subject I 8 CONVERSATIONS ON THE some measure, already; but do you think you will more clearly understand it in consequence of conversations upon it ? Maria. We hope so. In conversations, indeed, be¬ tween ourselves, we have rather puzzled ourselves than otherwise, which, perhaps, was the necessary conse¬ quence of our attempting to argue upon a subject of which we know a little, and only a little. Mr. B. Not improbable. But what is the sum of your present knowledge ? Maria. My brother knows more than I do; but he has only a kind of general and vague idea arising from books, which he has looked at, rather than examined, and of which he has no distinct recollection, owing to his having given himself up, of late, so exclusively to other studies. For myself, I can say very little; indeed, I am almost ashamed to say, that I believe in the truth of the Christian religion, because I feel I cannot do otherwise than believe—yet that is the fact. Mr. B. Can you not, in some measure, ascertain the grounds of your faith ? Maria. Perhaps I might, by hard thinking; but as I would much rather be able to “give to every one that asketh me a reason of .the hope that is in me,”—an an¬ swer founded on rational principles—you would, indeed, render me an essential service, by pointing out the par¬ ticulars wherein the real strength of the arguments, in favour of Christianity, consist. Edward. And jiot less so to me; for I'find the little knowledge of the subjecjt I at present possess wholly in¬ sufficient to satisfy my mind in many points. We both feel inclined to think, that Christianity must be true, but are perplexed by the circumstance of its truth being yet disputed, and know not well how to reconcile our minds to the fact, that many have rejected it. It is also very distressing, when one accidentally meets with persons 4 What knowledge of it does Maria say that Edward already has 1—-5 What does she know of it herself 1 ?—6 In what manner does she prefer to give the grounds of her (faith ?—7 With what does Edward say, that he and his sister are perplexed 1 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 9 of a sceptical turn, to be forced to bear the sarcasms they throw out, or the ridicule which they cast upon re¬ ligion, and feel that we have no right to reply, from ig¬ norance of the subject. Maria. And even in reading books, we do not- escape a painful sense of inferiority, as well as indignation, in. meeting with passages, that seem to strike at what we have been accustomed to reverence, but of which we cannot, immediately, see the falsity. Mr. B. I believe many persons, as well as myself, could fully enter into your feelings; and if I can, in any measure, enable you to build your faith upon a firm foun¬ dation, my labour will be abundantly repaid: but, do you think you will derive greater advantage from con¬ versations on the subject, than by reading some good treatise ? Maria. I shall feel more interested in conversations, than in the continued arguments of a theological disqui¬ sition. I fear, I have not sufficient strength of mind to examine the truth of the assertions of a learned divine, page by page. As Pope said to Atterbury, I always find the last author convince me. Edivard. On the contrary, I feel myself generally so much inclined to spend too much time in balancing prob¬ abilities, making nice distinctions, and examining all conceivable objections, that, in many cases, I quite lose the thread of the discourse, and forget the real force of the principal argument. Mr. B. It is well for you, that you have found out these tendencies to error in your minds. Maria. Most probably we should not, had we not con¬ versed together on the subject, when we found we differ-* ed so widely in opinion on many points, that we were led the more closely to examine ourselves, and each readily detected the faults of the other. 8 On what account does she say, that they experience a feeling of pain, when reflecting on the subject 1—9 What question does Mr. B. ask, as to the conversational form of discussion 1—10 What reply to it does Maria make 1—11 What reply to it does Edward make 1—12 In what manner does Maria say, that she has learnt her own liabilities to error 1 10 CONVERSATIONS ON THE ’ Edward. It is on this account, also, that we should prefer continuing the consideration of the subject in con¬ versations. In many cases, we have perplexed our¬ selves needlessly, I am convinced, by losing sight of the great object we ought to have had in view, viz. the sim¬ ple truth : and by dipping into many books, I have only made the matter worse; for, as fast as one difficulty was cleared, another started up, of which the author, per¬ haps, took no notice; and the habit of doubting, I found much more easily acquired than discarded. Maria. Do you not think, my dear father, that con¬ versation has its advantages, in enabling one to obtain . much information not usually met with in books, or dis¬ persed in so great a number as to be almost out of reach, as well as in securing the thorough examination of each portion of the subject? , Mr. B. It undoubtedly has; but, perhaps its principal advantage will be found in its being the plan yourselves have suggested. My own knowledge of the subject has been acquired in a manner so very different, that I hard¬ ly know how far I shall be enabled to bring it before you, in so clear and convincing a form, g.s the impor¬ tance of the subject demands. Much, however, de¬ pends upon yourselves; and as I shall take care to give you references to authors, whose opinions are of far greater weight than mine, you must be careful not to attach any weakness to the argument as developed by me, till you have first examined the original works, and seen how far the apparent deficiency may be inherent in the nature of the subject, or only the consequence of my inefficiency. I should by no means consider myself justified in proceeding in this undertaking, if I thought you would depend solely on my statements, and did not search whether these tilings be so or not. I shall give you a fair statement, to the best of my power, remem¬ bering well the danger incurred by those through whom 13 How does Edward say, they have needlessly perplexed themselves 1 14 What question does Maria ask her father, as to the conversational form 1—15 What answer does Mr. B. give her 1 —16 What does he tell her he shall take care to do 1—17 How does he promise her he shall pro¬ ceed in the argument 1 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 11 an offence cometh; but, as the subject is of so grave a nature, and so much depends upon it, I must entreat you well to watch over both yourselves and me, in which case I trust our conversations will prove a mutual benefit. Maria. But you will not make our understanding the subject, depend upon our reading the authors you refer to? ! Mr. B. I hope to be able to give you a clear and cor¬ rect idea of it, without your having occasion to refer to any work; but I can only give you an outline, which you must yourselves fill up at your leisure, and accord¬ ing to your own peculiar wants and difficulties. Edward. But, if the arguments you adduce are, in themselves, satisfactory, where will be the need of fur¬ ther inquiry? If not, it appears to me hardly probable, that the perusal of many volumes, in detail, would strike more forcibly, than their condensed force delivered at once. ' Mr. B. In the course of the inquiry, it will, however, be necessary to consider various objections : now many of these, though found to be flimsy and worthless when examined, are yet specious, and not easily overthrown in few words. There is no objection, of consequence, which has not been fully considered, and, in my opinion, satisfactorily answered; but it is impossible for me, in many cases, to convey to your minds the force of the reasoning which has been employed in these answers,— and mere assertions are of no value. It is easy to pro¬ duce the effect on the one side, but difficult on the other: not because truth is with the former, and not with the latter; but because truth has, in such cases, to be search¬ ed for diligently before* it is apparent; and, till that is done, we cannot altogether reject the pretensions of false¬ hood, dressed in the garb of truth. It is in cases like these, that full conviction can only be produced by full 18 What question does she ask her father 1—19 To what extent does he promise to instruct her 1—20 What question does Edward ask his father, as to the course to be pursued 1—21 What does Mr. B. say of the objections, that have-been made to Christianity 1 ?—22 How does he say these objections operate on the mind 1—23 How does he say, that full conviction is to be produced 1 12 CONVERSATIONS ON THE investigation, and from my anxiety not to injure the cause, which I cannot but believe to be divine, that I earnestly impress upon you the necessity of inquiring fully in every case, where you see reason to doubt the accuracy of my statements, or the correctness of my con¬ clusions. Marin. It would be unjust, both to you, and to the cause you advocate, not to follow your directions in this respect: but I trust you will, however, allow us the ut¬ most latitude of personal inquiry, which time will permit. Edward. And you will permit us to state, not only the objections, which really have weight in our own minds, but also those which we have heard, and which, though they do not so much affect us, we yet find it difficult to answer properly. Mr. B. Certainly; but I would not have you waste your time in searching out difficulties, or in bringing objections, which you are conscious do not deserve an answer. Inquire boldly and diligently as to what is the truth; but remember, that the inquiry is of too much importance to permit trifling and sophistry. Edicard. There is, then, an objection, which is some¬ what connected with the observations you just now made, which seems to deserve some consideration. From what you there stated, it would appear, that no full conviction of the truth of Christianity, unmixed with doubt, can be obtained without diligent inquiry, proceeding from per¬ sonal interest in the subject? Mr. B. Certainly not, if you mean rational conviction. Edward. But if so, where is the right of censuring those, who, not feeling sufficient interest in the subject, have no motive for inquiry? Mr. B. But why do they not feel sufficient interest in the subject? Can a rational creature be justified in re¬ garding what assumes to be a revelation of the will of his Creator, with indifference? 24 What objections does Edward propose stating 7—25 What does Mr. B. say, as to the importance of the subject, and the manner of treating it ? 26 What objection does Edward say is connected witli the observations made'!—27 What question does Mr. B. ask concerning indifference of feeling to the subject of religion 7 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 13 Edward. But, might not a Deist rationally think, that the world would do very well without Christianity, with¬ out any revelation? Mr. B. If you put this question with reference to the knowledge of God, and of our moral duty, as existing at the present day, which we can deduce from first princi¬ ples, and which is generally termed natural religion, your objection is unfairly stated; for the advocate for revelation argues, that the very knowledge, which we now possess, would, in all probability, never have exist¬ ed, without revelation. You assume the point in dis¬ pute, if you take it for granted, that all the religious knowledge, which we are now enabled to found upon principles of strict reasoning, exclusively of revelation, has been discovered by the mere light of reason. “The lights of reason and revelation fall upon our path in rays so blended, that we walk like the summer even¬ ing traveller, who, enjoying at the same time the full orb of the moon, and the sun’s solstitial twilight, is unable to ascertain the proportion in which he is indebted to each of these heavenly luminaries: and some of us, alas! are such incompetent philosophers, as, because the greater is below our horizon, to attribute all to the less.” — Napleton’s Advice to a Student in Divinity. Edward. But the advocate for revelation is no more at liberty to assume, that our present knowledge of God and of our duty arises from revelation; than the Deist to affirm, that reason alone is sufficient. Mr. B. Certainly not. Edward. But, if we may argue from analogy and the poAvers of the mind, as developed in other pursuits, may we not infer, that reason is sufficient, Avithout revelation, for our guidance? Mr. B. If the discovery of our duty towards God and man, as founded in religion, Avere a matter of mere cu¬ riosity, perhaps I might partially admit the truth of your 28 Wherein does he say, that Edward deals unfairly 1—29 What does he accuse him of assuming t—SO What quotation is made from Napleton 1 31 What reply does Edward make to it 1—82 What question does he ask, respecting an argument from analogy 1—83 What reply dues Mr. B. make to it 1 2 CONVERSATIONS ON THE 14 supposition; but it is a matter of infinitely too much im¬ portance, for us to suppose, that the great Creator would leave it to be developed only in a long course of ages, by the slow advance of real knowledge and certain truth. Maria. Admitting the possibility of human reason be¬ ing sufficient to discover the truth, do you not see, broth¬ er, that, arguing from analogy, many ages would elapse, in all probability, before the principles of natural religion would be so established as to become binding upon the bulk of mankind ? Mr. B. But we need not argue only from analogy and the probabilities of the case: let us refer to facts, and you will find, that the common sense of mankind is against you. Almost all nations have some notion of there having been a revelation or communication from the Creator to his creatures. Many have had their laws and civil polity founded in the idea of something of the kind; and the philosophers of old, who were sceptical as to the truth of the popular religions, agreed as to their want of divine revelation to declare the will of God. Now, subsequently to the establishment of Christianity, this want of divine aid has no longer been felt, and there is, therefore, considerable probability, that Christianity is a divine revelation, from the very argument brought forward by the Deists, as to there now being no neces¬ sity for any revelation; nor can this be overthrown, ex¬ cept by showing, not only that reason possibly might ar¬ rive at similar conclusions, as to natural religion and moral obligation, without the aid of revelation, but, also, that there is a strong probability, that it actually did so, and that the results were imputed to revelation, for the sake of giving greater authority to them in the eyes of those, who would be little disposed to acquiesce in con¬ clusions, backed only by their intrinsic excellence and the authority of their fellow-men. 34 What does Maria say of arguing from analogy"?—35 What facts does Mr. B. mention, as superseding the necessity of reasoning from anal¬ ogy t—36 What does he say is true, upon this subject, subsequent to the establishment of Christianity 1 ?—37 How can this argument be over¬ thrown 1 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 15 Edioard. There certainly would be a want of authority to establish the principles of natural religion, which rev¬ elation alone could supply. But, is there that prima facie necessity of inquiring into the truth of an alleged revelation, which is generally supposed? May not a person leave the matter to be discussed by those who are so disposed, without troubling himself about it, pro¬ vided he invariably obeys the dictates of conscience ? Mr. B. But, how can he be said invariably to obey the dictates of conscience, who neglects to inform himself upon this subject? In order to establish your point, you should show, that mankind are under no obligation to endeavour to obey the will of God; for, if they are, they must be under a necessity of inquiring into that will; and if not, there is an end of all religion, whether revealed or natural. The advocate for revelation argues thus, and I do not see how his reasoning can be over¬ thrown: that, from whatever sources our knowledge may have been obtained, it is certain, there is a God, the Creator of all things, of infinite power, wisdom, and goodness, and, consequently, a moral governor: that, From me relation in which man is placed to him, and the course of providence, it is probable he may have made a revelation of his will; and, therefore, no one is at lib¬ erty to reject, without inquiry, that, which professes to be a divine revelation, unless it involves such evident absurdity, that inquiry becomes needless. Maria. The Christian would also insist further, that there is not any such evident absurdity in the supposi¬ tion, that Christianity is of divine origin, sfnd hence would infer, that no one could be justified in neglecting it. Mr. B. And still less in rejecting it without examina¬ tion, as some do. Edward. But, many have not the means of instituting an investigation into its truth; and what are we to think, 38 What reply does Edward make to this 1 —39 In order to establish this point, what is necessary t—40 What does Mr, B. say is certain 1— 41 W) iat follows from this fact 1—42 On what further does Maria say the Christen would insist 1— 43 What difficulty does Edward suggest 1 16 CONVERSATIONS ON THE when told, that “ he who believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damnedV ’ Mr. B. Do you not see how you are confounding things, that are unconnected with each other? Belief necessarily implies a knowledge of the subject to be be¬ lieved: in the case of ignorance, there is neither belief nor unbelief. Wilful ignorance you have before seen to be criminal: you must know, that the doctrine of Chris¬ tianity is, that we shall be judged according to our works,—the motives, which influenced us, and the means put in our power. Edward. Yet, still, if full conviction cannot be obtain¬ ed without inquiry, and the bulk of mankind cannot in¬ quire, from the very nature of the subject, and yet the defenders of Christianity allege, that the most serious consequences will ensue in a future state to all who re¬ ject it; do not these circumstances, taken together, con¬ stitute an argument of considerable force against it? If full conviction cannot be obtained without inquiry, and the bulk of mankind cannot so inquire, can we suppose God requires an impossibility? Must not the tenet be given up, or Christianity itself fall to the ground? M ma. But, if the tenet be given up,, it ceases to be a matter of importance, whether Christianity be true or not, and it becomes merely a matter of curiosity, whether mankind have been imposed on or not. Mr. B. But, upon what authority do you assume, that the peculiar nature of the evidences in favour of Chris¬ tianity is of that kind, that it can only be examined so as to carry conviction to the minds of a few? Edward. It is generally regarded as the province of the learned: the bulk of mankind are altogether incapa¬ ble of receiving and judging of the evidences of Chris¬ tianity. Mr. B. But, with regard to all, can you not conceive 44 In this, how does he confound things, which are unconnected 1—45 What further interrogatories does he propose 1 —46 If the tenet be given up, what does Maria say is the consequence 1 —47 What question does Mr. 13. here ask 1—48 What does Edward say of the bulk of mankind, touching the subject I EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. t7 the possibility of Christianity’s possessing a certain de¬ gree of evidence sufficient to produce conviction? Edward. Yes; but that, which is false, may, upon a partial view, and for a time, appear true. And how can the illiterate Christian be sure he has not followed cunningly devised fables?” Mr. B. Out of the thousands, that make use of the common rules of arithmetic, and well-known results of geometry, how many do you suppose ever investigated the truth of those rules,—hoAV many are there able to investigate them? Edward. Very few indeed. Almost every mechanic knows the forty-seventh proposition of the first book in Euclid, and confides in it implicitly in fact: but, I sup¬ pose not one in a thousand of those, who make use of it, could prove it. Mr. B. Yet, the universal use made of it, proves, that the evidence for it is to their minds irresistible. What, then, is that evidence? whence does it arise? Edward. I should suppose, from experience: they find it always true in practice, and, therefore, conclude it must be so in theory. Mr. B. And may not the unlearned Christian find Christianity so invariably true in the excellency of itg precepts and knowledge of human nature, as to draw a similar conclusion? So far as his knowledge went, he might have every reason to believe it true (the Christian asserts that he ivould), and no reason to believe it false, and would, therefore, be bound in conscience to obey it. Maria. This would, however, suppose belief founded on erroneous principles, with regard to many. Mr. B. Not on erroneous principles, but what to oth¬ ers would be defective principles. But all moral obli¬ gation must depend on the situation in which we are placed, and the means put into our power. Now, one 49 What question does he ask, concerning the illiterate Christian 1 —50 How does Mr. B. reply to him, by an- allusion to a scientific subject t—51 What confirmation is added to his allusion, by reference to the 47th propo¬ sition of Euclid 1—52 What inference is suggested in relation to the truth of Christianity 1—53 What objection does Maria offer to this 1—54 How does Mr. B. answer her objection 1 2 * 18 CONVERSATIONS ON . THE distinguishing feature of the evidences of Christianity, as of its precepts, is, that whilst it includes the greatest, it descends to the least; nor is there any intermediate stage in which it leaves the mind unsatisfied; at least, so the Christian asserts; nor can he be confuted, without that very examination, which it is his object to obtain. Edward. But nothing is easier than making assertions, and threatening awful consequences: all religions do the same. The evidences of all, to the votaries of each, appear irresistible; yet all cannot be right; all, except one, must be false, nay, perhaps even all are false; yet all profess to be divine revelations, and, according to jour argument, are entitled to examination. Maria. But examination of all is impossible, in the nature of things. Mr. B. It is so, nor is it necessary. You forget, that I limited my assertion as to the necessity of inquiry to those cases “ where there %vas no such evident absurdity as to render inquiry needless .” Maria. This restriction is certainly reasonable, and will greatly shorten the inquiry. Edward. But, is it not objected, to all pretences to revelation, that, if God had revealed his will to mankind, Ije would have put the matter out of all doubt—made it fully apparent to all nations and every age? Mr. B. But, what have we to do with suppositions? We have to inquire into what has been done, not to spec¬ ulate on what might have been done. Nothing can be more absurd, or unphilosophical, than to form mere hy¬ potheses of the manner in which it may please God to act towards mankind. Without revelation, we are almost wholly in the dark: we know nothing of God, but by his works and providence; and the case of a revelation is one, that we cannot measure by any known standard. We can only argue from analogy, and analogy certainly 55 What comparison does Edward make between different religions 1 56 How does Mr. B. obviate the force of this comparison t—57 ^Vhat objection does Edward ask, as to the degree of evidence in favour of a divine revelation, which may lie presumed 1—58 . .' ■■ -■■■■■ ■ ■ ■ -■-. 85 What does Maria say of the argument thus presented *!—86 What is supposed a Christian may tell an unbeliever 1—87 And what reply might the latter make to him 1—88 With what additional remarks doe* Mr. B. conclude the first conversation 1 EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. any events taking place, as in this case, we know, that the real importance of such an event, to us, is measured jointly by its probability and its consequences: now, the consequences are infinite, in case Christianity be true; and, therefore, he is inexcusable, who rejects Christiani¬ ty without examination, or neglects its claims. CONVERSATION II. Mr. B. Having seen the necessity of an inquiry into the truth of the Christian religion, we are naturally led to ask, by what means we can ascertain it. Edward. We are here under great disadvantages, in that so long a period has elapsed since its first promul¬ gation. Mr. B. But, in consequence, we have no reason to believe, that any further discoveries, relative to the sub¬ ject, Will hereafter be made. Edivard. From the disagreement of its partisans among themselves, we are also deprived of the benefit of immediately ascertaining what is Christianity, and oi> what foundation it rests. Maria. Yet this secures the certainty, that there is no collusion. Edivard. And, from the rejection of it, by many emi¬ nent men, we have some reason to fear, that all inquiry will prove fruitless. Mr. B. Their exertions against it, have, however, been of the greatest use in eliciting truth, which is the great object we hate in view.—Let us now see, whence we can obtain information on the subject, confining our¬ selves strictly to facts, which all acknowledge. We have, then, the existence of three religions, a good deal 1 With what observation does Mr. B. introduce the second conversa¬ tion 1 —2 What does Edward say may still impose difficulties in the in¬ vestigation 1—3 What does Mr. B. say has been of great service in elicit¬ ing truth 1 3 CONVERSATIONS ON THE 26 connected with each other, but, of which the advocates of each maintain, that the followers of the other two are deceived. We have the records, to which these parties respectively appeal, as containing the sum of their relig¬ ions, and for which they claim a divine origin. We have, lastly, an immense mass of controversial writing upon the subject, which the advocates of each party regard as decisive. But, Mohammedism overthrows itself; and hardly the shadow of a proof remains in behalf of Juda¬ ism: so, that our attention is only directed to the works of their advocates, so far as they may be likely to over¬ throw Christianity. Edward. We have, also, to consider the works of those, who have rejected all revealed religion, as the modern Deists, and those who rejected Christianity at its first appearance among the Pagans. Mr. B. At present, I assume nothing, however, rela¬ tive to the first appearance of Christianity; that is a mat¬ ter for future consideration. Now, the truth of the re¬ ligion, independently of what internal evidence of a divine origin its sacred records may furnish, evidently depends upon the truth of those records, and that, upon the writ¬ ings of those, who have defended them. These writings, t also, must be considered in two classes. We either re¬ fer to them for arguments, or for facts. With reference to the former, it is of no consequence when they were written, as truth is invariable; with reference to the lat¬ ter, it is of the greatest consequence in some cases, and in all of considerable importance to determine their ori-r gin. Maria. Will you give us a sketch of the history (if I may so call it), of the controversies, which have taken place on the subject, and which hawe given birth to the writings, which form the materials in question? Mr. j B. You will find an admirable outline already 4 Wliat is said of the evidence of the three religions here presented to view 1—5 Of Mohammedism and Judaism, what is said 1 —6 On what docs the truth of Christianity depend, independent of its internal evidence 1 7 What is said of the classification of the writings to be examined in this discussion 1—8 What request does Maria make 1—9 What is said of the admirable outline of this history, to which Mr. B. refers I EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 27 traced, by the hand of a master, in the first volume of Bishop Van Mildert’s Boyle Lectures, and, in the notes to it, abundant references to the best sources of informa¬ tion. An historical survey of this kind, however, implies some knowledge of the subject itself in the reader, as, otherwise, it is a mere recapitulation of disputes about names, to which no distinct ideas are attached. You must, therefore, for the present, content yourselves, with references to the works, which give an account of the various defenders and opponents of Christianity. The best of these is, Leland’s View of the Deistical Writers, which is very valuable, from giving a fair statement of their writings in detail, and a temperate reply to each, though rather tedious, from the nature of the subject. Maria. The name -of Deist, only refers to modern wri¬ ters against Christianity, I believe. Mr. B. “The name of Deists, as applied to those, who are no friends to revealed religion, is said to have been first assumed about the middle of the sixteenth cen¬ tury, by some gentlemen in France and Italy, who were willing to cover their opposition to the Christian revela¬ tion, by a more honourable name, than that of Atheists. One of the first authors, as I can find, that makes ex¬ press mention of them, is Viret, a divine of great evi¬ dence among the first reformers, who, in the epistle dedicatory, prefixed to the second tome of his Instruction Chretienne, which was published in 1563, speaks of some persons in that time, who called themselves by a new name, that of Deists.”— Leland’s View, Sfc. Letter I. Baruel’s Merhoirs of Jacobinism, will give you suffi¬ cient information, with respect to the French authors on this subject, and you will find a great deal of useful in¬ formation in Nichol’s Literary Anecdotes of the Eighteenth Century. Hartwell Horne’s Introduction to the Critical Study of the Scriptures , and Orme’s Bibliotheca Biblica, also give references to some of the more important works; and the Bibliotheca Britannica of Dr. Watt, under the 10 Which is the best of the works, to which allusion is made’?—11 What does Mr. B. say of the origin ofthe name of Deists 1—12 What is said of Baruel’s Memoirs of Jacobinism 1 ?—13 What other works are named 1 28 CONVERSATIONS ON THE articles of Scepticism, Infidelity, &c. &c. will direct you to many more.—To you, Edward, I may also recom¬ mend the Bibliotheca Theologica Selecta of Walchius, and the Delectus Argumentofmn et Syllabus Scriptorum, fyc. of Fabricius. It may be as well to mention here, that sortie very valuable articles, either directly upon some branch of the evidences, or intimately connected with them, have appeared in various reviews, particu¬ larly the British Critic, and the Quarterly Review, which jmu will find well deserving of your attention, after you have acquired further knowledge of the subjects most agitated in controversy. The Boyle, Bampton, War- burtonian, and Hulsean Lectures, together with various essays for prizes, given at the Universities and else¬ where, must not be forgotten; and, lastly, as the original Encyclopedic contains almost all, that can be insinuated against Christianity, the English Encyclopaedias , in gen¬ eral, are well worth consulting on its behalf, both for the intrinsic value of the articles, and the references they give to the authors, from whose works they are com¬ piled. Maria. Must not a distinction be drawn, between those writers who establish facts, and those who merely argue from such facts? Mr. B. Certainly; in the first "case, we have princi¬ pally to do with the truth of the statements; in the sec¬ ond, with the soundness of the arguments. Edward. Does not the quantity of writing on the sub¬ ject, in some measure militate against it? If the eviden¬ ces are sufficiently convincing, surely it could never be necessary to write so much; and the doubts and difficul¬ ties of its opponents must have some solid ground, or they would never be so often renewed. Mr. B. Christianity is not answerable for the conduct of its advocates, further, than it may be shown to dictate it. You cannot infer the weakness of a cause, from the 14 What is said of the English Encyclopedias 1 —15 What supposition does Edward make, indicat'ng the insufficiency of the evidence in favour of Christianity 1—16 Is Christianity answerable for the conduct of its advocates 1 EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 29 imbecility of its defenders. But, the advocates of Chris¬ tianity, you will find, men of a very different class. The deep interest of the subject, has been the primary cause of the great number of publications on it. As to your second objection, Dr. Gerard will answer it for me. “ There is no subject, on which doubts and difficulties may not be started, by ingenious and disputatious men; and, therefore, from the number of their objections, and the length of the controversy to which they give occa¬ sion, we cannot, in any case, conclude, that the original evidence is weak, or, even, that it is not obvious and striking. Were we to presume, that every principle is dubious, against which specious objections may be con¬ trived, we should be quickly led into universal scepti¬ cism. The two ways, in which the ingenuity of specu¬ lative men has been most commonly employed, are, dog¬ matical assertions of doubtful opinions, and subtle cavils against certain truths.”— Gerard’s Dissertations, vol. ii* P- 4 , Edivard. I would not bring forward objections, merely for the sake of shewing my own ingenuity in devising them; but, before I feel entirely satisfied, as to the jus¬ tice of your arguments against those, who neglect to in¬ quire into the truth of Christianity, and reject it without examination,—it appears to me necessary to shew, that there is some reasonable prospect of their being able to come to a decision on the subject,—which, I think, is not the case: the dispute appears interminable. If there were any one treatise extant, which Christians would agree in, as being that defence on which they were wil¬ ling to rest the issue of the inquiry, there might be some hope of coming to a decision; but, when the whole Chris¬ tian world is at variance, not only as to what is Christi¬ anity, but, also, as to how it is to be defended, surely some allowance must be made for men, who have other things to attend to, as well as theological inquiries. 17 What does Mr. B. say of them 1 —18 What is the substance of Dr. Gerard’s remarks, quoted in answer to one of Edward’s objections 1—19 Why does he bring forward objections 1—20 What apology does lie think may be given, for the neglect of many, in making a decision upon the subject 1 30 CONVERSATIONS ON THE Mr. B. There is no solid argument in your objection: any one, who is really anxious on the subject, will soon obtain sufficient information, both as to what Christianity is, and by whom, and in what manner, it has been de¬ fended, and will naturally turn to the examination of that kind of proof, which has most weight with him in other subjects. Besides, the clergy furnish a constant re¬ source. Edward. But, if Christianity be of that great impor¬ tance, which is alleged, why has not the whole body of proof been collected and arranged, in.such a manner as to enable every one, at once, to see all that can be said in its favour? I know, indeed that there are collections, professing to be demonstrations of the proof of the Chris¬ tian religion; but, there is none, so far as I have ever heard, which all agree in holding forth as such. Chris¬ tianity is either capable of demonstration, or it is not: if the latter, I do not see how it can be defended at all, unless the threatening declarations of the New Testa¬ ment are explained away ; but, if the former, why have we not such a proof as the Mecanique Celeste is of the Newtonian system of the world? Mr. B. Because, the nature of the subject hardly will admit of such a proof; and beefause, if it did, it would be useless. Absolute mathematical demonstration cannot be obtained. All that is necessary to be obtained, in proof of Christianity, is such a degree of probability, as ought to induce men to act agreeably to it. For, if it can be shewn, that men act, in other cases, upon less proof than this question affords, their own conduct suffi¬ ciently proves the truth of the assertion of our Lord, “ That this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world; but. that men love darkness rather than light, because their deeds are evil.” You refer to the Meca- niqve Celeste, as being an example of a perfect proof of the theory of universal gravitation; suppose a person in 21 What reply does Mr. B. make to this 1 —22 What question does Edward here propose, intimating a doubt as to the supposed importance of Christianity 1 —23 How does he present the argument 1 —24 What does Mr. B. say,of-the. absolute proof in its favour, which .Edward desires 1— 25 How does lie illustrate the unreasonableness of Edward’s request 1 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 31 common life was desirous of knowing all “ that could be said in favour” of that theory, how far would the Meca- niqtie Celeste afford him assistance? Edward. He would hardly understand a page of it. Mr. B. Then, where is the utility of your complete demonstration for common use? The very first para¬ graph of the work alluded to, altogether overthrows any argument you can raise from the existence of the work itself, both as respects absolute demonstration and prac¬ tical utility. If the observations on which astronomy is founded, and which demand the greatest degree of at¬ tention, as.well as perfection of instrument, be incorrect; or that refined analysis, which it requires the utmost ex¬ ertion of the mind to follow, be in any instance fa'sely applied, all falls to the ground. • Need I remind you of the necessity there is for applying to the whole of the results obtained, in the most careful manner, the theory of chances, for the calculation of the probability of er¬ rors ? Edward. But, the proof of Christianity is not of so complicated a nature; if it were, it would, itself, be an objection; for, it would be impossible, that the bulk of mankind could understand it. Mr. B. The full proof of Christianity, if systematically detailed, would be quite as complicated, and altogether removed above the reach of ordinary men: but, a proof sufficient to convince every rational man, is within the reach of all. Maria. In what manner? Mr. B. A proof, such as your brother demanded, must ultimately depend upon the books of the Old and New Testaments, in their original languages: the origin of those books, would, therefore, have to be ascertained, which would involve the question, also, of the authen¬ ticity and credibility of all those authors, on whom we depended for information on the subject; and these. 26 What does he sav of the Mecanique Celeste, as tending to aid the objection of Edward '!—27 For what does he say there is a necessity 1—* 28 If the proof of Christianity were complicated, what does Edward think would be the consequence ?—29 What does Mr. B. say of this 1—SO O®. wlul would depend a full proof of Christianity, systematically detailed * 32 CONVERSATIONS ON THE again, dependent upon others; and, then, would come the calculation of chances of error. Judge, from this one portion of what would be requisite, what the whole would be. On the other hand, such a proof as ought to convince a rational inquirer, may be soon made out; there are abundance already in circulation. Thus, when I say Christianity is the religion founded by Jesus Christ, as contained in the New Testament, which is a collec¬ tion of writings of his first followers, and proves, from facts, which cannot be denied, and reasoning, which cannot be overthrown, that the religion itself is from God; which is further established by the Scriptures of the Old Testament, by the internal evidence of the ex¬ cellency of the religion, -and by the history of the world, —I sum up the proof of Christianity; and, if any one deny, or doubt the truth of any of these assertions, I have a right to refer him to those authors, whose works, in detail, fully prove these points. I may, to shorten his labour, give an analysis of the process used to establish each of these particulars; but, it can no more be expect¬ ed, that I should give all the detail, than, that Laplace should have first established the truth of every proposi¬ tion in pure mathematics of which he makes use. Edward. But, Laplace quotes them, because they are indisputable: now, the proofs of the particular proposi¬ tions, on which the truth of Christianity depends, are not so. Mr. B. Have they been disproved? Edward. Not that I know of: but many eminent men have rejected Christianity, and have written against it. Mr. B. You may rely upon it, that, had any actual demonstration been made out against Christianity, you would not have been ignorant of the fact; its enemies have been too active to let any thing of that kind be passed over. Now, consider, for a moment, the extent 31 How does Mr. B. state the leading facts in the Christian system ? 32 If one were to doubt, or deny, the truth of any of these positions,'how ought he to be 01611—83 In what wav does Mr. B. refer to Laplace l— 34 How does Edward aim to controvert this argument 1—35 If any de¬ monstration had been made out against Christianity', wh.i> would hara been the consequence 1 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 33 of proof on behalf of Christianity, and from how many quarters it has been open to exposure, if false. In its statements of historical facts, in criticism, in morality, in physical truth. If it could have been positively proved, for example, that such a person as our Lord Jesus Christ never existed, or, that the New Testament was a forgery, or, that it was contrary to sound morality, or, that it con¬ tained statements contrary to what we know to be the real state of the earth, or commanded observances im¬ possible, in the nature of things, to be observed by all men, at the same time, that it professed to be of univer¬ sal obligation; in any of these cases, the question would have been set at rest for ever. You have also just as¬ serted, that many eminent men have written against it : now, if they could thus have proved Christianity to be false, would they not have done it? Maria. Certainly; for, by their writing against it, they shewed their wish to prove it false. Mr. B. Yes; and by their net writing against it in those particulars, where their peculiar knowledge best enabled them to detect falsehood, they have given us the strongest proof, that there it was invulnerable. Maria. So, that the very fact you adduce, i§ against you. Mr. B. But, there are other eminent men, besides the Deists; and, what do you say to the testimony, which they give on the points, where they were best able to determine the truth or falsity of these propositions? Why, those very men, whose names stand the highest in each department, are defenders of Christianity, and that, because they knew, in what they were most immediately concerned with, the proofwas decisive. Now, take these two facts together, and you will see, there is sufficient ground for belief, that the professed proofs are real proofs. But, if any one is disposed to doubt further,, let 36, What does Mr. B. tell Edward to consider !—37 What case does lie take for illustration !—38 What question does he ask Edward, con¬ cerning the persons who have written against Christianity!—39 How did they show, that they considered it invulnerable!—40 What two facts does Mr. B. present to the consideration of Edward and Maria !—41 if any fine is disposed further to doubt, what is he to do ! CONVERSATIONS ON THE 34 him examine; the whole is open to examination; but not condemn others for looking upon such points as' proved, which those, most inimical to Christianity, and peculiarly fitted to examine, have not disproved, as well as resting satisfied with the researches of its friends, who believed, in consequence of those researches, and whose testimo¬ ny, in any other case, would have been believed in such subjects as they were most conversant with. Edward. This, however, is placing the belief of many upon a lower ground, than that of others. J\lr. B. It is, and, in the nature of things, it must be so. Men are placed in such an infinite variety of situa- - tions, that the great Creator of all can alone be the judge, as to where guilt attaches, and where it does not. All that I contend for, is, that no sufficient reason can be adduced, on behalf of actual infidelity,, scepticism, or latitudinarianism, to militate against the language of the New Testament. The Judge.of all the earth shall sure¬ ly do right; and every circumstance of birth, education, and situation in life, will have its due weight with him: but, the result of much reading and reflection on the sub¬ ject, has led me to a conclusion, which you may at pres¬ ent think harsh,—that the real cause of infidelity lies in the heart, more than in the head; in the will, more than in the circumstances of the individual. CONVERSATION III. Edward. I fear I have wearied both you, sir, and my sister, by my former objections: but, my anxiety to have my mind at rest upon all preliminary points, previously to entering upon the actual examination of the evidences 42 To what statement of Edward, ddes Mr. B. assent”?—43 Of.what does he say, that the great Creator alone can be the Judge 1—44 For what does he contend 1—45 Where does he say, that infidelity lies ? 1 With what remark does Edward commence this conversation ”! EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 35 themselves, induced me to press the doubts I have already expressed; and, fbr the same reason, I should wish to consider one more and very serious objection, which ap¬ pears to me to lie at the threshold of all further investi¬ gation, viz. that the. whole proof of Christianity depends upon the veracity of those interested in its defence. Maria. Not all, brother. Edivard. Yes, all, directly or indirectly. It is from Christians, that we have our accounts of the origin and history of Christianity. It is from them, we have re¬ ceived the Scriptures, which contain its precepts; from their hands, also, have we received the works of those, who rejected this religion, and which may have been garbled to serve its cause. If even their own statement be correct, for fifteen hundred years every thing has been in their own power. Its defenders, in later ages, have been evidently interested in supporting it: of those, who lived at an earlier period, we know nothing, but through the accounts of their successors. These defenders, also, have been the priests of this religion, and had, therefore, a further interest in maintaining it. How, then, can we rely upon any proof derived from such sources? Maria. This is, indeed, a strong charge; can you over- thrbw it, sir? Mr. B. As far as is necessary. I must, however, take it for granted, that you are acquainted with what is gen¬ erally believed to be the true history of Europe, during the period you have alluded to, I must, also, beg you to give some attention to the present state of the Chris¬ tian world. Edivard. It is divided into a great number of sects, all at variance with each other. Mr. B. You will not dispute, I suppose, the truth of those facts, which are acknowledged by persons of all parties, infidels as well as Christians. Edward. Certainly not. Mr. B. And, I suppose, you will acknowledge, that 2 From whom do we receive accounts of the origin and progress of Christianity t—3 What inference does Edward think mav be drawn, from this circumstance,-against its truth 1 —4 What does Mr. B. take for grant¬ ed 1 —5 What does he suppose 7 CONVERSATIONS ON THE 36 the works, generally received in thd world, as the pro¬ ductions of the persons whose names they bear, for the last ihree centuries, at least, were really such. Edivard. Undoubtedly; the invention of printing sets the matter at rest. Mr. B. Then, it is certain, that never were nations more opposed to each other, than many of the Christian sects have been. Could there have been any system of deception in common, among those, who persecuted each other to death? Edward. I should think not. Mr. B. If there had been any system of deception kept up among the priests, would it have been concealed, notwithstanding all the martyrdoms that took place ? Edward. No; those, who were put to death by Chris¬ tians, would never have died in the faith of Christ, had they not believed the religion of Christ to have been from Heaven. Mr. B. The whole of the documents, then, on which we rely, could not have been forged subsequently to the Reformation. Now, of what character were the ages, which preceded it? Edioard. They are generally called the dark ages, from the deplorable state of ignorance in which the great mass of the people were. Mr. B. From the best sources of information, relative to that period, what was the character of the clergy ? Edward. Very low indeed, both as to morals and as to intellectual attainments. Mr. B. If, then, the documents of the period, which preceded it, were forged at that time, we should be com¬ pelled to believe, that thousands of manuscripts were written, with the most consummate art, and dispersed, 6 What does he suppose, in relation to the writers of the last three cen¬ turies 1—7 What does he then presume to be certain, in relation to many of the Christian sects 1—8 When Edward admits this, what question does Mr. B. ask him 1 —9 In relation to those put to death by Christians, what does Edward assert 1—10 Of what character were the ages, which pre¬ ceded the Reformation 1—11 What was the character of the clergy, dur¬ ing those ages 1—12 If the documents of the period preceding the,Refer-' mation, were forged at that time, what should we be forced to believe 1 EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 37 with the greatest care, by men utterly unqualified for the task, and some of them containing sentiments most con¬ tradictory to the course of life they were pursuing; doc¬ uments, which, when known, must occasion the downfal of their own pretensions. Edward. That is wholly incredible. Mr. B. If, then, the manuscripts of the fathers, and 1 the classics, were really written by the persons, whose names they bear, and at the times and in the places al¬ leged, (with the MSS. of the New Testament I do not concern myself at present), how far is it probable, such were corrupted by those Christians of the middle ages, through w r hoee hands they passed? Edward. We know, that the manuscripts of the class¬ ics, were found neglected in the libraries of monks, who knew not the value of what they possessed. Those of the Fathers, were transcribed, and held of the greatest authority all over Europe. Any interpolation of the works of the former, would never have been an object— any interpolation of those of the latter, impracticable. Mr. B. When these works were first edited, was it with reference to the interests of Christianity ? Edward. No: some of the revivers of literature, were even suspected of infidelity; and those, who edited the Fathers, never thought of making use of them to defend Christianity itself. Mr. B. Then, where does the slightest probability ex 1st, that the documents, on which we depend for the de¬ fence of Christianity, are otherwise, than what they pro¬ fess to be—genuine productions of the persons, whose names they bear, written at the times and places alleged, and handed down, in substance, the same as originally written? For a more particular account, of course, I must refer you to the successive editors of each, who have laboured to send out the works of each author, as free from defect as possible. 13 What question is asked by Mr. B. respecting the. manuscripts of the fathers and the classics 1—14 What reply does Edward make to it 1—15 Were these works first edited with reference to the interests of Christian¬ ity !—lfi Of what is it asked, by Mr. B., where exists the slightest proba¬ bility! 38 CONVERSATIONS ON THE Edward. But, admitting that all the works, to which it may be necessary to refer, in proof of the truth of Chris¬ tianity, be genuine and unadulterated, it by no means follows, that they are true. In some cases, at least, very little weight can be attached to the declarations of the fathers; for, I believe, it is generally acknowledged, that they were both credulous, and addicted to exagger¬ ation. Mr. B. Perhaps so; and we must, therefore, be care¬ ful not to estimate their statements beyond their intrinsic value. Edward. But, in some particulars, we are almost cer¬ tain, they have recorded, what they knew *to be false: and, is the testimony of such persons worth any thing? Does not their conduct throw strong suspicion on the re¬ ligion itself? Mr. B. One of the most violent of those, who have impeached their authority, speaks thus:— “ The history of the Gospel, I hope, may be true, though the history of the church be fabulous. And, if the ecclesiastic historians have recorded many silly fic¬ tions, under the name of miracles, as they undoubtedly have, the blame must be charged to the writers, not to their religion.”— Middleton’s Works, vol. i, p. 131,4to ed. The use, which I shall make of their works, will be such as cannot be materially affected by your objection. Maria. Where they speak of things as passing under the public eye, or as being acknowledged by their ene¬ mies, or challenge investigation, in cases where it could easily have been made, and would have decided the question, some degree of credit must be allowed them. It is not to be imagined, that they would give their ene¬ mies so easy a triumph over them, as to render them¬ selves liable to certain exposure, by greatly departing from the truth in such points. Edward. In cases, where their statements are corrobo- 17 What assertion does Edward make, on the supposition, that the works in question are genuine 1—18 And, what question does he ask, in reference to the admission of Mr. B., that this supposition may be cor¬ rect 1 —19 What quotation is made from Middleton, on the subject?!—20 Jo what cases does Maria consider these writings entitled to credence 1' ’ EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 39 rated by the acknowledgment of their enemies, or by the fact of no contrary statement having been published, which might reasonably have been expected, there appears no sufficient ground, for withholding the assent we should give to any indifferent matter of well-authenticated his¬ tory. There must, however, be some cases, in which we shall be reduced to their testimony alone, and that, per¬ haps, in points of great importance. Mr. B. We must, therefore, the more carefully exam¬ ine into the real probability, or improbability, of the truth offsuch portions. Maria. But, the evidence, thus scattered through a variety of authors, in different languages, is completely inaccessible to ordinary readers. Mr. B. It has been collected., arranged, and trans¬ lated, for their benefit, by the defenders of Christianity, in later times. Maria. But, how can we place reliance upon works of this nature, made by any man, who has a personal inte¬ rest in maintaining one side of a disputed point? Mr. B. Surely, ordinary readers may place reliance upon the accuracy of his translations, when, after a con¬ siderable lapse of time, his most acute and learned ad¬ versaries have never called their fidelity in question. Gibbon was no friend to Christianity, yet he placed the greatest reliance upon the labours of “the indefatigable Tillemont,” and “the laborious Lardner.” It also so happens, that those, who have laboured most in works of this kind, could gain or lose very little, whatever might be the result. Maria. Be that as it may, still it is reasonable to con¬ clude, that personal interest does bias many of the de¬ fenders of Christianity, and prejudice many others of those, who may be so circumstanced, as not to have much to gain or lose. If men fancy Christianity to be a great 21 In what cases does Edward consider them entitled to it 1—22 Into ■what, then, does Mr. B. think, that examination should be made 1 —23 Why does Maria think this evidence inaccessible 1—24 How is difficulty removed 1—25 On what ground may reliance be placed on the accuracy of these translations 1—26 What does Maria consider a reasonable con¬ clusion, in relation to this matter 1 CONVERSATIONS ON THE 40 public good, in the first instance, it is hardly likely, that their inquiries, into its truth, will be perfectly fair. Mr. B. So far as the presenting a faithful statement, of all, that is known on the subject, is concerned, such collectors of ancient testimonies, have long been open to detection by their adversaries; but, these, having brought no counter-statements, the unlearned have a right to con¬ clude the former are correct. As to opinions, formed upon such collections, they must, of course, be tried by their intrinsic Avorth, and the degree to which they are borne out, by the authorities, adduced. In the fact, of the matter being equally open to all parties, consists the real ground of confidence. Edward. But, considerable allowances, I think, ought to be made, for the partiality, which it is natural a man should feel, for any line of argument, which he may have struck out. I can hardly imagine any one so entirely destitute of personal feeling, as to examine a matter of deep interest, when his view of it appears nearly estab¬ lished, with the same equal mind, with which he com¬ menced his inquiries. Mr. B. But, others do not feel this predilection; ma¬ ny, perhaps, are opposed to it. There is a tendency, no doubt, in the minds of some, to distort facts, so as to fur¬ ther an hypothesis; but, since this exists, on the one side, as well as the other, we are pretty certain, that neither will allow the other to continue the publication of false statements, uncontradicted. Edward. But, readers are prejudiced, as well as wri¬ ters. Those, who wish to find Christianity true, are not likely to examine statements in its favour, with that de¬ gree of severity, which the subject requires. Mr. B. That some do not, is certain; but, knowing your liability to err, in this respect, you can the more diligently guard against it. 27 Why have the unlearned a right to conclude, that the ancient testi¬ monies, on the subject, are presented to us correctly “?—28 For what does Edward think considerable allowance is to be made t—29 In what does Mr. B. suppose, there is an antidote to this partiality, in Christian writers I—30 How does he meet Edward’s difficulty, in respect to read¬ ers, as well as writers I EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 41 Edward. But, if the generality of readers do not, one very material point is gained against Christianity, viz.. the alleged general superiority of the Christian advo¬ cates, over their antagonists, is accounted for, and no argument can be drawn, from the fact of the prevalence of the religion, and its successful resistance of all the attacks, that have been made upon it. All argument, founded upon .the conduct, also, of the defenders of Christianity, must depend upon the probability, that they were neither deceivers, nor deceived; but, surely, this probability is much diminished, by the causes just men¬ tioned; and how, then, can it be inferred, that Christi¬ anity must be true, because it has been advocated by wise, and good, and learned men? Mr. B. It cannot be inferred, that it must be true; but, that it probably may be true, is not an unfair conclu¬ sion. The possibility, that such men have been deceiv¬ ed, must certainly be allowed; but, from this, we can only infer, that their example, alone, is not a sufficient reason, for embracing this religion; and, that their rea¬ sons for so acting, ought to be examined, rather than implicitly received. Edward. But, in addition to prejudice, in favour of Christianity,, the clergy (on whom the task of defending it is naturally devolved), must have been interested, as well as prejudiced, advocates. Mr. B. Are you £ure, that you can establish that point ? Edward. Many of the most eminent obtained high pre¬ ferment. Mr. B. But, was it in consequence of their labours in this cause? Was preferment a probable consequence? I mean, so far as to induce the clerical advocates to de¬ fend it? 31 What does Edward suppose is a material point gained against Christianity'!—32 On what does he suppose the argument, founded* upon the conduct of the defenders of Christianity, must depend 1—33. What re¬ ply does Mr. B. make to this 1—34 What does Edward say of the clergy, who were the advocates of Christianity 1 —35 What reply is made to his assertion, that many of the most eminent obtained high preferment ! 4# 42 CONVERSATIONS ON TttE Edicard. I cannot say, decidedly; but, it appears to me, no very improbable supposition. Mr. B. A more correct knowledge of church history, would have taught you to form a very different conclu¬ sion. But, whom do you regard, as the more eminent defenders of Christianity ? Edward. My knowledge of the subject is only very light; but', the names, which more immediately occur to me, are those of Sherlock, Butler, Warburton, Wat¬ son, Porteus, Lesley, Leland, Bentley, Clarke, and Paley. Mr. B. In general, what should you think of the in¬ tellectual powers of these men? Edward. Very highly. Mr. B. You would not, then, think them liable to be deceived, where they gave sufficient attention to the subject? Edward. Not unless their wishes, to find some opin¬ ion correct, biased them. Mr. B. And you will allow, that to this subject, they did give sufficient attention? Edward. Certainly: their superior advantages, arising from their intimacy with it, is one of the things, which, I think, goes far to account for their superiority over their antagonists. What chance could such a man as Paine have with Watson, even supposing the former had been right? But, the fact of their supefior advantages, does not exclude the probability of their being prejudiced and biased, by their wishing to prove Christianity true. Mr. B. As to their wishes, in early life, we know noth¬ ing; and, it is too much, to take it for granted, that they only inquired into the truth of Christianity, after they had pledged themselves to support it. But, passing over that, do you think, they were originally strongly biased in favour of the established creed, or not ? 86 Who are named, as among the more eminent clerical defenders of Christianity 1—37 What were their intellectual powers t—38 Does Ed¬ ward think they could have been deceived 1—39 Mr. B. asks him, if they gave suflficieht attention to the subject—how does he reply to this ques¬ tion t—40 What does Mr. B. say, is too much to take for granted 1 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 43 Edward. Not, perhaps, strongly; but, still, in such a measure, that they would be contented with less proof, than would have satisfied men of their acuteness in other subjects. Mr. B. What, then, is your idea of the nature of the evidences of Christianity ? Is its proof so strong, as to put the matter out of all doubt; or, merely such as to persuade, in conjunction with prejudice and interest? I presume you would not assert, that these celebrated men were conscious, they were defending a bad cause ? Edward. Certainly not; but, the second position ap¬ pears to me so far probable, as to deserve serious con¬ sideration: if the first were admitted, of course the whole ground of controversy would be given up. Mr. B. Nevertheless, as the first affords the most nat¬ ural, full, and sufficient reason, for the conduct of those, whom you allow to have been very superior men, even after all the deductions, that can reasonably be made, the fact, that such men have been the defenders of Chris¬ tianity, must afford some degree of probability of its truth; but, admitting the second to be more correct, how comes it, that there has been no honest man found, among all the numerous and learned Christians, of all classes, who have undertaken the defence of that religion, to avow the truth? You acknowledge the ability, the acuteness, the learning, of those you have mentioned; and the list might, without much labour, be greatly extended. Now, how does it happen (if there was any weakness or defect in the evidences), that they should have all professed the same conviction, have all pushed the matter into notice, and courted a discussion, which they knew would prove fatal? We have instances of men changing one modifi¬ cation of Christianity for another; relinquishing prefer¬ ment, and exposing themselves to persecution, for con¬ science sake. But, where are those men of sound mind, who, after a full investigation, have renounced the relig- 41 In the form of two positions, relating to the evidences of Christian¬ ity, What question does Mr. B. ask Edward —42 How docs Edward reply to it 1—43 Admitting the second position suggested to be correct, what question does Mr. B. ask, as involving an extraordinary fact 1— 44 How does he illustrate this question 1 44 CONVERSATIONS ON THE ion itself altogether? Do you think, you could bring forward any twelve men, of competent talents, and learn¬ ing, who are known to have been free from all bias against Christianity, and who can be proved to have fully exam¬ ined into its claims, who yd rejected it? You think much of the power of prejudice; but, I will remind you of a set of advocates for Christianity, who have been accused of a spirit very opposite to prejudice, and equally power¬ ful—a love of innovation and change; advocates, indeed, who have not left formal written treatises, but, whose works will be remembered, whilst the world lasts. Were the reformers, whose blood was poured out like water, men of light minds, prejudiced, and interested? When they burst from the yoke of Rome, would they have re¬ tained that of Christ, had they doubted the verity of his religion? Would it not have been as easy to die for De¬ ism as for Christianity? Were the rack and the stake likely to endear the profession of that name? No, no! When Luther stood in the Diet of Worms, with the fate of H uss before his eyes, and said, “Thus I believe; I cannot do otherwise—God help me!” his faith was not weak, nor ill grounded: when Ridley and Latimer ex¬ pired in the flames, they had not lightly discriminated between the religion of Christ, and that which condemn¬ ed-them to death. They knew, there was a reality in Christianity: they feared not man, who was able to kill • the body, but God, who, after death, could destroy", both body and soul in hell. Of the names you mentioned, some were men of remarkably independent mind; of a cast of character, that scorned subjection to the dictates of any man, or set of men; who injured their own inter¬ ests in life, in consequence of their freedom in speaking and acting. Is it probable, that such men, would have suffered their minds to be blinded, in that, with which they were most conversant ? You just mentioned Leslie, 45 What questions does he ask, as to persons, having examined the evi¬ dences of Christianity, and then having rejected it 1—46 To what other set of advocates for Christianity does Mr, B. advert 1—47 What ques¬ tions does he propose in respect to them 1—48 What does he say of Lu¬ ther, and of Ridley, and Latimer 1—19 What is said of the independence of some of these men l EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 45 as one of the most eminent of the clerical defenders of Christianity. You, perhaps, were not aware, that, prior to the abdication of James II., he had made himself ob¬ noxious to that monarch, from his steady opposition to the Papists, and afterwards became equally so to his successors, from his conscientious adherence to the ex¬ iled king; and, in consequence, was reduced to great distress, towards the conclusion of his life. Would you not think him, then, worthy of belief, when you find him writing thus, with what he believed would be “the last effort of his pen?” “ If, in writing so much, and on so many subjects, mistakes have crept in, I hope they are not of im¬ portance; and, such as they are, could I examine and discover, I should readily retract them, and disown noth¬ ing but artifice and malice, from which my own con¬ science acquits me, and God, I hope, who is greater, will not condemn me. I have always thought it my duty to follow truth as closely as I could, without straying after worldly interest; and, though the providence of God, infinitely wise and righteous, hath, for a great part of my life, excluded me from the public exercise of that sacred office, to which I was called, yet I have the com¬ fort of having endeavoured, in some degree, to serve, against its various adversaries, the cause of God, of re¬ ligion, and of that church, in which I was baptized, edu¬ cated, and received into holy orders.—And, being now in a point of time, to which eternity is near, you will be¬ lieve me, if I declare (and to the world I would declare it), that, in this communion, I resolve to die, and expect to be saved, by the merits and mediation of Christ Je¬ sus.”— Leslie’s Theol. Works, folio, Pref. Ep. Edxvard. Still, allowance must be made, for habits of thinking too favourable to the side they espoused—pro¬ fessional predilections. Mr. B. A little more close examination will show you, that even the very habits of life, of several of the most 50 What is related of Leslie 1 —51 What question is asked of him '?— 52 What is the substance of the quotation from his writings 1 —53 For what does Edward think, that allowance is still to be made! 46 CONVERSATIONS ON THE eminent of these men, were unfavourable to your argu¬ ment. What tendency had the mathematical pursuits of Watson and Paley, to soften the severity of their judgment, with regard to Christianity? What tendency was there in the pursuits of Clarke and Butler, to this end? Was “ slashing Bentley,” think you, a man like¬ ly to be deceived, in his critical investigations, or cowed into silence, as to their results? Edward. But, their reputation, and literary character, might become involved in the defence. Mr. B. How, then, came their reputation to be so in¬ volved? Was any necessity laid upon them, to connect ' it with a weak argument? Were they likely men to do so? Had they felt the weakness of the cause, would they have dared to court a full investigation of it? Had Bentley and Warburton no enemies? Were there none living, who would have rejoiced to triumph over them? Why did they trouble themselves about the controversy, unless they believed it to be so important, that, at all events, investigation ought to take place, and the truth made manifest—unless they, also, regarded their own side so safe, that they feared no consequences—and, their own conviction of the truth of Christianity, was so strong, that they were willing to risk their own credit upon it? Edivard. That their own reputation was dear to them, cannot be questioned; and, it is no harsh inference, to conclude, that they would not lightly risk it for a doubt¬ ful cause; but, some allowance must be made, for ex¬ pectations of preferment, in case of success. Mr. B. To establish that, you must first show, that they were so keenly on the watch for preferment, and, that there was a hope of it, arising from the line of con¬ duct, which they pursued, sufficient to have induced them to pursue it, which I am persuaded you are unable 54 What questions does Mr. B. ask, of Watson and Paley—of Clarke and Butler—and of Bentley t—55 How does he reply to the intimation of Edward, that their reputation was involved in the defence t—56 What individuals are named, as illustrative of his reply 1—57 What expecta¬ tions, does Edward think, might have-influenced them 1 —58 To establish that, what does Mr. B. say he must do 1 EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 41 to do. But, even were this the case, would it follow, that there tyere no other, no shorter roads, to preferment —-or, that none, but this, was adapted to the temper of their minds? If they felt the cause weak, could they imagine, that those above them, (who must have known it, also), would thank them for forcing it into notice— or, that they should serve their own interests, more ef¬ fectually, by turning aside from those paths of science, and general literature, for which nature appeared to have intended them, and in which they were fully conscious of their own power? Again, have you a right to assume such a want of upright principle, in so numerous a body as the defenders of Christianity have now become? Can you, for a moment, imagine, that such an uncertain hope would prevail against reason and principle; that, men of talents, of learning, and of acknowledged integrity, in other points, would suffer their minds to be so biased, by an uncertain hope of this kind; that, they would run the risk of exposure, nay, even court it, when the other means of rising into distinction, were before them? Com¬ mon sense tells us, that such men, would not so act; that no wise, or able man, would risk his character, un¬ necessarily, for that, which he barely believed. We must, therefore, conclude, that the labours of such men, would not have been undertaken, without a full and overpowering conviction, of the truth of Christianity, and did not arise from a belief so feeble, as to require the aid of church emoluments to strengthen it.—This subject has occupied a considerable portion of our time; but, as I wish you to examine the original works, rather than to rely on the arguments I may select from them, it is of great importance, that you do not suffer the con¬ viction, which I am confident those works will produce, to be weakened by unfounded assertions, as to interest, and prejudice, in the authors; assertions, easily made; but forming a miserable reply to the works in question. 69 What question is asked, respecting them, on the presumption, that they considered their cause weak 1—60 What one is asked by Mr. B., relating to their integrity 1—61 What reply is given to it!—62 What does he desire Edward to do, for his own conviction on the subject 1 48 CONVERSATIONS ON THE Edward. Is it not, however, to be regretted, that, in controversies on this subject, the defenders of Christian¬ ity had one very material advantage over their opponents, in that it was their principal study? Mr. B. But, is this advantage unfair? Can it, or ought it, to be objected to? With whom does the fault rest, if the parties are unequally matched in point of intellectual strength and acquirements? Whence are the defenders of Christianity to arise, if not from those, who give up their lives to its service ? What would be the result, if the professors of arts and sciences, in general, were sus¬ pected in their statements, merely because they were professors? Am I to reject the experiments of Newton, and refuse to look at his Principia, because he was Lu¬ casian Professor of Mathematics at Cambridge? Am I to question the accuracy of Porson, because he was Greek Professor? I cannot pretend to make the experi¬ ments in the one case, or to consult the manuscripts in the other; and I might be told, that each of these great men was interested and prejudiced; yet, who would not laugh at me, were I, therefore, to resolve, I would pay no regard to either? We cannot believe, that the love of emolument, prejudice, or vanity, could so bias such men as to induce them to make false assertions of facts, in which they were liable to detection by all who enviqd their talents, coveted their situations, or disliked their peculiar views. Why, then, should I doubt the accura¬ cy of the critics of the New Testament, or turn a deaf ear to the argumentation of Butler and Paley? Edward. But, had the enemies of Christianity been as well versed in these subjects, as its clerical advocates, the result might have been very different. Mr. B. This is mere assumption; and I have equal right to assume, in reply, what appears to me a much fairer conclusion; that, had the enemies of Christianity read and thought more, they would have written less. 63 What advantage does Edward say the defenders of Christianity had over tlreir opponents 1—64 How does Mr. R. reply to it 1—65 What is the allusion to Newton and Porson 1 ?—66 What cannot we believe, re¬ specting them 1 —67 Under what circumstances does E'dwtrd say, that, the result might have been different 1 —68 Is this probable I EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 49 In some cases, we know, that increased knowledge of the subject, has produced a very different result; it has not only silenced, it has converted, the enemies, into the friends of Christianity. Edivard. Do you, then, think, the works of its advo¬ cates are to be received in the same manner, as if they had been the productions of persons to whom the result were a matter of indifference? Mr. B. I think, considerable allowance is always to be made for prejudice, as arising from the circumstances of birth, education, disposition, and habits of life; in the case of the clergy, also, from attachment to their profession; and, in some cases, for a predilection to certain courses of study, in preference to others, and to peculiar lines of argument, which they have, themselves, invented, or greatly improved. But, I think, they ought to be fully acquitted from the sweeping charge, of acting from those interested motives, which their enemies delight to impute to them; and, am fully persuaded, that nothing, but strong conviction, would have produced the greater part of the many very able treatises, which have been written in de¬ fence of Christianity. To their works, therefore, I would give all the attention, which the character of the authors as well as the importance of the subject, demands; remem¬ bering, however, that, as men, they were liable to be mis¬ taken—as the abettors of a system, still more so. Their statements of facts, in cases where I was unable to verify them, by an appeal to the original sources of information, I should be disposed to admit; their reasonings, on those statements, I should wish to examine as strictly as pos¬ sible ; and, mere declamation, I should reject altogether. Maria. With this, I shall be quite satisfied. Edward. And I, also. Mr. B. Perhaps you may; but, I am not: for we have ; hitherto, considered prejudice, and interest, as directed 69 What changes lias an increased knowledge been known to produce ? 70 For what, does Mr. B. admit, an allowance is to be made, in consid¬ ering this subject 1 —71 But, of what should the advocates of Christianity be acquitted ?—72 How, under this view of the subject, is Mr. B. dispos¬ ed to proceed in the investigation !—73 What does lie presume in this respect, of the enemies of Christianity 1 50 CONVERSATIONS ON THE only in favour of Christianity; but, some of its most dis¬ tinguished opponents have been, most unquestionably, both interested, ahd prejudiced, against it. What was the moral character of the French philosophists, who at¬ tacked it? What sort of men, have the English Deists, in general, been? If you would take a just view of the subject, you must bear this in mind also; and, consider how far its opponents have had knowledge of the religion in question; from what sources they derived it; how they were situated; what had been their habits of life; how far they were competent judges—considerations, which will make no sceptic eager for an inquiry into the degree, in which interest, and prejudice, have affected the question. The language of this religion is, “ If any man will do the will of God, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or of man”—a position, as reasonable as it is pious; but, among all the sceptics, where have we seen, that reverent anxiety to ascertain the will of God, and to do it? You have, also, particularly directed your argu¬ ments against the clergy of the Church of England, as interested and prejudiced advocates: you must, however, remember, that it is not they, alone, who are the defen¬ ders of Christianity: those, of every other church, do the same, in whatever circumstances they may be; and you must allow, that this agreement, in those, who, in other respects, differ widely, gives a strong presumption in fa¬ vour of Christianity. From the length of time this sub¬ ject has detained us, I shall not press this upon you, but only remind you of two other particulars, not lightly to be passed over by you. Edward. What are they? Mr. B. That, whatever deductions you now make, on the score of interest, and prejudice, only increases, ten¬ fold, the force of an argument, hereafter to be urged, on behalf of Christianity—the testimony of those, who, in 74 What is here intimated, of the French philosophers, and English Deists'!—75 Against whom, in particular, are objections made, in this conversation, as advocates of Christianity 1—76 What does Mr. B. say, furnishes a strong presumption in its favour t—77 What is the first of the two particulars, of which Edward is reminded, in the conclusion of this conversation 1 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 51 privation and suffering, maintained the truth of the Chris¬ tian religion. ; Edward. And the second? Mr. B. That the defence of Christianity has, by no means, been exclusively in the hands of its ministers; for, there have existed a considerable number of laymen, to whom the greater part of your objections are wholly inapplicable, who have, directly, or indirectly, maintain¬ ed its truth, and those men of the very highest order, neither the superficial nor the vain, neither bigots, nor enthusiasts, nor fanatics. I leave you to consider the names of Selden, Hale, Bacon, Milton, Boyle, Newton, Locke, Addison, Lyttelton, West, Johnson, Beattie, and Sir W. Jones; and, these are merely taken from those, who have flourished in England, and during the last two centuries. CONVERSATION IV. Maria. We hope you are now at liberty, my dear father, to enter upon such a developement of the evi¬ dences of Christianity, as may be best adapted to our use. Mr. B. I begin, then, by first stating, what it is my intention to establish, and, what I require to be granted me, in order to enable me to do so. My object is, mere¬ ly to exhibit a plain view of some of those facts, and ar¬ guments, which have most powerfully influenced my own mind, and which, it appears to me, ought equally to in¬ fluence yours. I shall not pretend to give you all the facts, which have been thought to elucidate the subject, 78 What is the second one 1 —79 Who are the individuals, recommend¬ ed to his attention ? 1 How does Mr. B. propose beginning his investigation of the evidence of Christianity 1 —2 Are all the facts and arguments, capable of being adduced here, to be used t CONVERSATIONS ON THE 52 and which have already been collected for that purpose; still less, is it my intention, to attempt the collecting all the arguments, which would be almost an endless task; but, I shall not keep back a single objection, nor sup¬ press a single circumstance, which, it appears to me, ought to deserve consideration. But, even with these limitations, it will be necessary, that we restrict our in¬ quiries to the simple question, as to the truth of the Christian religion, without entering into those of natural religion, or of the consequences, which must follow, as to doctrines, if Christianity be true. Edward. You assume, then, the existence of God, and the immortality of the soul? Mr. B. The general belief, in these points, authorizes me so to do. The first, must be true, and the second, at least, sufficiently probable for my argument; and, as I know you have, both of you, read Paley’s “Natural Theology,” and “Tremaine,” I shall refer you to those works, as sufficiently establishing them, and other pre¬ liminary points, which are necessary. The latter, is, at once, interesting and instructive: the former, above all praise. Maria. You will begin, then, with the quotation given in Tremaine, from Paley? I Mr. B. I shall, but do not bring it forward at present. I begin, with the mere matter of fact, that Christianity exists. For this fact, there must have been some cause,. and, that cause, is what it is necessary to ascertain. Edivard. But, though Christianity exists, who shall say, what is Christianity. The Christian world is split into ten thousand sects, which only agree in maintain¬ ing, that the religion itself is true. Mr. B. But, if I say, that Christianity is the religion founded by Jesus Christ, about 1800 years ago, in Ju¬ dea, upon the basis of Judaism, and that, by its excel- S How are the inquiries, on the subject, to be still further restricted'? 4 What two points are here assumed n —5 What does Mr. B. say, of these two points 1—6 On what account does Edward suppose, it is diffi¬ cult to tell what Christianity is 1 —7 In what particulars, does Mr. B» suppose, that all the different sects of Christians would agree 7 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 53 lence, it prevailed over all other religions, to the extent now manifest,—would not all these sects agree with me? Edward. Certainly; but, I believe it is doubted, by some, whether such a person ever existed; and your statement cannot, therefore, be admitted as true, in it¬ self, without proof. Mr. B. And what proof do you require? Edivard. The same, which would be necessary to es¬ tablish any historical fact. Mr. B. Is not the agreement of the Christian world upon it, sufficient to establish it? Edward. Their agreement, only proves their belief, and, that belief, only leads us to infer the probability, that it is founded upon some adequate cause. I should prefer the belief and testimony of enemies. Mr. B. And, that you have; for, but very few persons have been hardy enough to deny the fact. Maria. What account do they give, then, of the mat¬ ter? Mr. B. Their assertion is, that no such person, as the reputed Founder of this religion, ever existed; that, in short, it was merely a symbolical representation of the sun, which gave rise to the generally received accounts, and, that the leading events of his life, are to be taken allegorically, as referring to the heavenly bodies? Maria. And, is there any trace of this conjecture to be found, in history? Mr. B. Not the least; and, from the works alone, of the enemies of Christianity, we may prove the truth of the Christian statement. Edward. I should very much wish that to be done. Mr. B. You shall have your wish. I would, howev¬ er, observe, first, that there are three considerations, of very great importance, in this inquiry, relative to the Christian statement; for, in the first place, we possess a 8 What kind of proof does Edward require in the case 1—9 What re¬ ply does Mr. B. make to this 1 ?—10 What aceount do the enemies of Christianity give of the narratives in the gospel 1—11 Maria asks, if this is corroborated in history—what answer does Mr. B. give her 1—12 Mr. B says, there are three important considerations in this inquiry—which, is the first 1 5 * 54 CONVERSATIONS ON THE series of Christian records, the genuineness of which, is unquestionable, up to the very time, when this relig¬ ion first appeared, in which the same statement, now made, by the Christians of our time, is affirmed. Again; there has been no interval, in which documents of this kind did not exist; and, therefore, we trace up the as¬ sertion of the fact, by the Christians of every age, even to the very century, in which the religion is said to have been first promulgated; and, lastly, as the period assign¬ ed for the origin of this religion, is one, upon which, per¬ haps, more light has been thrown, than on any other of those, greatly removed from our own, no such suspicion rests upon the truth of these statements, as might have arisen, had the period assigned been indefinitely remov¬ ed, or involved in great obscurity. Maria. These circumstances are so strongly in favour of the Christian statements, that, unless counter declara¬ tions can be produced, by the enemies of Christianity, their testimony must be received. Mr. B. Let us, then, turn to the accounts of the four great classes of those, who have rejected Christianity; the Deists, of the last three centuries, the followers of Mohammed, the Jews, and the Pagans. With regard to the first of these, their information, on the subject, must be derived from sources equally open to us; and, there¬ fore, their opinion, when unsupported by authorities of earlier time, is only of value as their opinion, and, con¬ sequently, if unfavourable to the Christian statement, could not weigh against the positive testimony, given by the writers of preceding ages, that such was the belief in their time. But, though their opinion, if adverse, would not materially affect the Christian statement, their opinion, if in agreement with it, must have weight, be¬ cause we may reasonably conclude, from their rejection of Christianity, they would not have received the Chris¬ tian statements as true, had they not appeared to them 13 Which is the second X —14 Which is the last t—15 What does Ma¬ ria say to them t—16 What are the four great classes, that reject Christi¬ anity 1—17 What is said of the sources of information* in possession of Deists, on this subject 1—18 What is said of their opinions on it X EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 53 to have the force of truth. Turning, then, to the works of the Deistical writers, we find, that the modern opin¬ ion, by some, adduced against the fact of the existence of Christ, has not obtained, generally, among them; in fact, very few, indeed, have entertained it; and, conse¬ quently, from the conduct of the Deists themselves, we may reasonably conclude, there is no solid foundation for it. Edward. It is only surprising, that the objection should have ever been brought forward at all. Mr. B. Proceeding to the next class of antagonists, we find, the followers of Mohammed refer to the great work of the founder of their religion, as the supreme au¬ thority on this subject. By him, however, the existence of Jesus Christ is not only acknowledged, but assumed, as an essential part of the foundation, on which his own claims are established. The country, the life, and re¬ puted death, of the Founder of Christianity, must, there¬ fore, at that time, have been well known to be the same, as at present believed. Maria. This, also, carries us up to the beginning of the seventh century, and establishes the belief of the Christian statement, at that period, in the very coun¬ tries, where our Lord is said to have lived. Mr. B. The testimony of the next body of adversa¬ ries, is important, as being that of the descendants of those, who had once possessed that country, and “ of whom, as touching the flesh, Christ came,” and, in sub¬ stance, it agrees with the statement of the Christians; for, they allow, that Christ was the founder of the relig¬ ion, which bears his name; and, that he was put to death, by their ancestors, before the destruction of Jerusalem. Now, this last event is well known to have taken place in the year 70, and, therefore, it becomes certain, that the origin of Christianity, could not have occurred later, than a few years of the period assigned by its advocates. 19 And of the opinion, in particular, of some modern Deists, that write against the fact of Christ’s existence 1 —20 What is said of the followers of Mohammed, in relation to the existence of Jesus Christ'!—21 How does Maria reply to this fact'?—22 What is said of the testimony of the third body of adversaries to Christianity, the Jews'!—23 When was Je¬ rusalem destroyed 1 56 CONVERSATIONS ON THE Maria. Do the Jews assign no particular period for the appearance of Jesus? Mr. B. They do; but, as they differ among themselves, and are proved, by the testimony of all other nations, to be most careless, as to their chronological statements, we can place no dependence on the date assigned by the majority, which is considerably earlier, than that, given by the Christians, and is positively contradicted, by the testimony of another body of adversaries, on which great¬ er reliance can be placed. Edward. From what particular authors, do you obtain this information? Mr. B. From authority, which the Jews hold in the highest estimation, that of the Talmud, the date of which, may be referred to the year 500, and which, from the bitterness of its language, against the Founder of Chris¬ tianity, shows, the compilers of it did not possess the power to deny the facts above mentioned; whilst it leads us to suspect the truth of the imputations they cast upon him, and which you may see in Lardner. Edward. Then, do you think it just, to receive their declarations in the one case, and not in the other? • Mr. B. There is a probability, in favour of the former, which there is not, as to the latter. On referring to the passages in question, you will find, that the anecdotes bear such internal marks of falsity, that, had they appear¬ ed at an earlier period, they could hardly have been cred¬ ited by any one; but, we have a further confutation of them, in the fact, that, previous assailants of Christiani¬ ty, as devoted to their own faith as the compilers of the Talmud, and much more acute, have not left the slight¬ est trace of their knowledge of any such transactions, which they hardly could have failed to mention, if true. Edward. But, what authority have these previous au¬ thors, with the Jews? Mr. B. The Mishna, which was compiled by Rabbi 24 What is said of the account of the Jews, on the time of our Sa¬ viour’s appearance 1—25 What is said of the Talmud, as relating to the argument 1—26 What question does Edward ask, respecting the testimo¬ ny furnished in the Talmud 1—27 What is the reply of Mr. B. to him, on this point 1 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 51 Jehudah Hakkadosh, about the year 180 , holds the high¬ est place, and contains no proof against Christianity, drawn from false statements, on the part of its friends, and casts no imputation of immorality on its Founder. It only laments the decline of religion, intimates its fears, from the prevalence of the new faith, and confirms the fact of the destruction of Jerusalem having taken place, at the time usually assigned. Maria. We have, then, the testimony of the Jews, as well as of the Mohammedans, to the truth of the Chris¬ tian statement. Mr. B. There yet remains, the testimony of the advo¬ cates of that religion, which was overthrown by Christi¬ anity; they, therefore, cannot b^ less likely to state the truth, than either of those already considered. Here, indeed, we have no work, acknowledged by them, as of supreme authority, as in the two last cases; and, we must, therefore, trace the vestiges of Christianity, step by step, from the time of the last Pagans, to the time, when it first made its appearance. Edward. Those, however, who lived subsequently to the establishment of Christianity, as the religion of the state, can hardly be of so much importance, as those who preceded them. Mr. B. The state of the Pagans, under the Christian emperors, though certainly very unfavourable to them, was not, however, of such a nature, as to preclude their giving us considerable information, as to their opinion of Christianity, and the state in which it had existed, pre¬ viously to its establishment. The very manner, in which they write, respecting it, proves, as well, that they were under no constraint, as to this expression of their opin¬ ions, as, that they were not biased, in favour of the re¬ ligion of the court. Maria. But, if they were men of character, surely, 28 What is said of the testimony contained in the Mishna 1 ?—29 What other testimony remains to be considered ?—30 In examining the testi¬ mony of Pagans, in favour of Christianity, how does Mr. B. propose to proceed 1—31 What is remarked of the Pagans, under the Christian em¬ perors 1 —32 What does Maria suggest, concerning their rejection of Christianity 1 58 CONVERSATIONS ON THE their rejection of Christianity, under such circumstances-, ought to have great weight, since they lived near the times, in which truth could best be discovered; and, in¬ terest must have prompted many, to embrace the new religion. Mr. B. It is not without weight; but, this is not the place to consider it: we must pursue the more immediate object before us, viz. the obtaining certain knowledge, as to the state of Christianity, in their .times, and those which preceded them. Edward. It may, however, be conceived, they would not speak fully their opinion, as to their own times. Mr. B. Let us refer to facts*. In the fifth century, Proclus published eighteen arguments, against the Chris¬ tian religion, or, rather, Against one tenet of it, that the world had not existed, from eternity. The works of Zos- imus, manifest the most bitter hatred of Christianity, un¬ disguised and unsoftened; and, Hierocles so far provoked, the popular feeling, as to suffer severely from their indig¬ nation. Rutilius scruples not to attack the monastic sys¬ tem, at that time becoming very popular, using no very measured expressions. Maria. This would hardly have been tolerated, in some countries, now. Mr. B. Eunapius, who lived at the close of the fourth century, speaks not less freely. I give you Lardner’s translation, and refer you to him for further information. Speaking of Christians, Eunapius makes use of the fol¬ lowing language. “Thus, these warlike and courageous champions, overwhelming all things, with confusion and disorder, but foully defiled with avarice, gave out, that they had overcome the gods, and boasted of their sacrilege and impiety. Then, they introduced into the sacred places, a sort of people, called monks,—men, it is true, as to 33 What reply does Mr. B. make to her 1 —34 What is said of Proclus 1 35 What is said of Zosimus, Hierocles, and Rutilius 1 —36 Who else is named, as speaking very freely, in the fourth century, upon these matters 1 37 From whom, is a long quotation, showing the freedom, with which Pagans expressed their opinions 1—38 What are some of the principal accusations against Christians, in this quotation 1 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 59 their outward shape, but, in their lives, swine, who open¬ ly suffered and did ten thousand wicked and abominable things. Nevertheless, to them it seemed to be an act of piety, to trample under foot the reverence due to the sa¬ cred places: for, every one, that wore a black coat, and was content to make a sordid figure in public, had a right to exercise a tyrannical authority: such a reputation for virtue, had this sort of men attained. But, of these things, I have already spoken in the Universal History. Then, monks were settled at Canobus; who, instead of deities, as conceived in our minds, compelled men to worship slaves, and those, not of the better sort, neither. For, picking up and salting the bones and skulls of those, whom, for many crimes, justice had put to death, they carried them up and down, and showed them for gods, and kneeled before them, and lay prostrate at their tombs, covered over with filth and dust. There were some of them (called martyrs, and ministers, and intercessors with the gods), slaves, that had served dishonestly, and been beaten with whips, and still bore, in their corpses, the scars of their villanies. And, yet, the earth brings forth such gods as these.”— Lardner, c. liii You will not, I think, after this specimen, suspect the Pagan testimonies of any undue predilection in favour of Christianity, nor of any reluctance to conceal, what they deemed its weaknesses. Edward. It is also evident, that, though the popular feeling was turned against idolatry, there yet remained a strong body of the philosophising Pagans, who prefer¬ red it to Christianity. Maria. They also give a very disgusting picture of Christianity. Mr. B. It is drawn by the hand of an enemy, you must recollect. The next testimony I shall cite, gives some¬ what a different idea: Ammianus Marcellinus, in one place, speaks of the office of a Christian bishop, as “re¬ commending nothing but justice and lenity; ” and, in anoth- 39 What does Mr. B. say, of this specimen of Pagan testimony 1—40 What does Edward say of it 1 —41 What account does Mr. B. give of Ammianus Marcellinus 1 60 CONVERSATIONS ON THE er, still more expressly reasons against the luxury of the metropolitan prelates. “ But, they might be happy, indeed, if, despising the grandeur of the city, which they allege as an excuse for their luxury, they would imitate the life of some country bishops, who, by their temperance, in eating and drinking, by the plainness of their habit, and the modesty of their whole behaviour, approve themselves to the eternal De¬ ity, and his true worshippers, as men of virtue and piety.” — Lardner, c. li. Speaking of Constantius, he gives this character of the religion itself:— “ The Christian religion, which is, in itself, plain and simple, he adulterated, with a childish superstition: for, studying it with a vain curiosity, instead of a sober mod¬ esty, he raised many dissentions, which, when caused, he cherished and increased by a strife about words.”— Lardner, c. li. Maria. These extracts give a very different impression to the last; there is a distinction evidently drawn, between Christianity, and corruptions of it. Mr. B. The whole of this author’s statements, are so accordant with those of the Christians, that I wish time permitted my giving more; but, I must content myself, with observing, that he speaks of the Christian sects be¬ ing very bitter against each other, and conveys the idea of Christianity being decidedly the religion of the great body of the people, and yet he praises Valentinian, be¬ cause “ He stood neuter, between all the diversities of re¬ ligion, and was troublesome to none; nor did he require any one to follow, either this, or that. Nor did he strive, by severe edicts, to bend the necks of his subjects to his own way of worship; but, left matters untouched, in the condition he found them.”— Lardner, c. li. Edward. There is, however, in these extracts, little 42 What is the quotation from him, respecting the metropolitan pre¬ lates 1—43 What does he say of Constantius 1—44 What does Maria say, of these last quotations 1 —45 What does Mr. B. say, of this author’s statements 1—46 What is quoted, respecting Valentinian, from Lardner 1 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 61 reference to the state of Christianity, before the time of its establishment. Mr. B. There is; but, even silence, here, becomes important; for, had the Christian accounts been false, as to leading facts, we can hardly suppose, they would have been passed over, by authors like those we have re¬ ferred to. The gradual decline of Paganism, afforded ample time for full investigation; and, certainly, of all persons, the philosophers of Alexandria, and Athens, had the best means of detecting falsehood, had it existed; and, we may, therefore, regard their silence, as strongly corroborative of the truth of the Christian statements, as to the origin and progress of the religion. Maria. There does not appear, any trace of Christi¬ anity having been promulgated, by means similar to those employed by Mohammed. Idolatry was, indeed, put down; but, there is no proof, that conversion was press¬ ed upon the people, though the example of the court must have had great influence. Mr. B. The next authority to be produced, will not make this conduct of the Christians less remarkable. Libanius, in his funeral oration on the emperor Julian, has the following memorable passage, which clearly shows, in what state Christianity had been, in the earlier stages of its progress. “ Having paid all honours due to Constantius, he be¬ gan with remedying matters relating to the gods, sacrifi¬ cing in the view of all, and expressing his satisfaction in those, who followed him, and deriding those, who did not, and endeavouring to persuade them to imitate him, but without compulsion. Indeed, they, who were in wrong sentiments, were filled with fear, and expected pulling out of eyes, beheadings, and rivers of blood flowing from innumerable slaughters; and, that this new lord, would find out new ways of torture; and, that fire and sword, 47 What does Mr. B. say, of the comparative silence of Pagan writers,, respecting the history of Christianity t—48 What comparison does Maria here make, between Mohammedism and Christianity t—49 Who is the next Pagan author introduced 1—50 On what occasion, does Libanius fur¬ nish oppoitunity to be quoted t—51 What is the substance of the quota, tion from. Libanius 1 ) 6 CONVERSATIONS ON THE 62 and drowning, and burying alive, and amputation of limbs, would be trifling things. Such things had been practised, by those who ivent before; but, now, more griev¬ ous things were expected. But, Julian dissented from those, who had practised such things, as not obtaining the end aimed at; and, he was sensible, that no benefit was to be expected from such violence. For, men, la¬ bouring under diseases of the body, may be relieved by bandages; but, a false opinion about the gods, is not to be expelled by cutting and burning; and, if the hand sacrificeth, the mind reproves the hand, and condemns the infirmity of the body, and still approves, what it ap¬ proved before. There is only an appearance of a change, but no real alteration of sentiment. Moreover, they, who comply, are pardoned afterwards, and they, who die, (under torture) are honoured as gods. “ Considering, therefore, these things, and observing, likewise, that their affairs had been increased by slaugh¬ ters, he declined what he could not approve of. Thus, « he brought over all to the truth, who were to be per¬ suaded; but, did not compel those, who were in love with falsehood.”— Lardner, c. xlix. Edioard. This is, indeed, very important testimony. There is no mention made, here, of any cause for per¬ secution, beyond the holding these sentiments; nor of any cause of success, on the opposite side, beyond the endurance of sufferings. | Mr. B. We have, also, an oration by the same author, on behalf of the temples, which is translated at length, in Lardner, and which establishes some very important facts, in addition to the above; one of which is, that Christianity was, at that time, the prevailing religion, and heathenism in a weak and declining state; and, anoth¬ er, that the Christian laws “ do not permit persecution , but commend persuasion, and condemn compulsion.” i Maria. But, does not the appeal to Christian princi¬ ples, imply, some degree of persecution existing? i Mr. B. The oration is addressed to Theodosius, and 52 What does Edward say, of the testimony of Libanius 1 —53 What other important testimony is there, from the same author t —54 To whom was that oration of Libanius addressed 1 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 63 the occasion of it was, the pulling down of some temples, without the express orders of the emperor. That no au¬ thorised persecution of the Pagans took place, and that the emperor did not sanction any outrages, which the populace might perpetrate, under the pretext of zeal for Christianity, is abundantly manifest, from the whole ora¬ tion; but, one passage is so remarkable, that, notwith¬ standing the time already spent, in examining extracts upon this subject, it cannot be omitted. He asserts, that those, who had suffered from Christian zeal, were not liable to penalties, from having actf the New Testament appear to limit the date of its composition? Mr. B. The opinion of Michaelis is, that they must have been written before the year 120. Edward. But this only proves in general that their ori¬ gin must have been before that date, and that they were of Jewish extraction. It does not establish their being independent authors. Mr. B. No: for this, we must examine the style of each. “But similar as these writings are to each other in Oriental idioms, they are equally distinct and characistic in the particular style of their respective authors. They cannot, then, have proceeded from the hands of a single impostor; and the supposition of their being an acciden¬ tal collection of spurious writings from different authors, is attended nearly with the same difficulties as the former hypothesis. Whoever reads with attention the thirteen \ 55 What would have been the difficulty of'imitating the Oriental style 1 ? —56 What must we suppose of the Christians of the second and third cen¬ tury, if the New Testament were a forgery ]—57 What is said of the lan¬ guage of the early fathers?—58 What is the limit of the date of the com¬ position of the New Testament?—59 How is the authorship of each book to be established?—60 Why could not these books have been produced by the same impostor? EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 141 epistles of St; Paul (for at present I do not include the Epistle to the Hebrews), must be convinced that they were all written by the same author, who has so many distinguishing marks, that he is not easy to be mistaken. On all these thirteen epistles is impressed the character of a man well versed in the Greek language, and pos¬ sessed of general erudition, who could use the finest and even the severest irony, without rejecting the rules of decency; but who, in consequence of his Jewish original, and his indifference with respect to style, abounded in Hebraisms and Syriasms, and sometimes borrowed from the place of his birth even the provincial expressions of Cilicia. An equal degree of similarity is to be found between the Gospel and Epistle of St. John; and the only compositions of the same author which, notwithstanding their general resemblance, betray a difference of style, are the Gospel of St. Luke and the Acts of the Apostles; his Gospel abounding with harsh and uncouth Hebra¬ isms; while the Acts of the Apostles, though not free from Hebraisms, are written in a language that approach- * es nearer to purity and classical correctness. The reason of this difference Avill be explained at large in the Second; Part.” Maria. If I understand the argument right, it would have been as impossible for any one to have produced writings of this nature, in a dialect which was, when spo¬ ken, confined to a particular district, after that dialect had become extinct, as for a person now to write in the old Norman French of the middle ages eight sets of chronicles, containing all sorts of allusions to things which had become obsolete, and preserving different styles for each set, as well as an obsolete dialect for the whole. Mr. B. And in addition to this, you must now take into account the difference of disposition, and the general character of mind developed in these documents, only to 61 OP what must a person be convinced on reading the epistles of Sf. Pauli—62 What is impressed on them!—63 Which of the other books is particularised in this place, and what is said of them'?—64 What illustra¬ tion does Maria give of the argument?—65 In addition to this, what does Mr, B. say must be taken into the account? CONVERSATION'S ON THE 142 be accounted for by the supposition of their being genu¬ ine. “The writings of St. John and St. Paul discover marks of an original genius, that no imitation can ever attain, which always betrays itself by the very labour excited to cover the deception; and if we consider at¬ tentively the various qualities that compose the extraor¬ dinary character of the latter apostle, we shall find it to be such as no art could ever imitate. His mind over¬ flows with sentiment, yet he never loses sight of his prin¬ cipal object, but, hurried on by the rapidity of thought, discloses frequently in the middle a conclusion to be made only at the end. To a profound knowledge of the Old Testament he joins the acuteness of philosophical wis¬ dom, which he displays in applying and expounding the sacred writings; and his explanations are therefore some¬ times so new and unexpected, that superficial observers might be tempted to suppose them erroneous. The fire of his genius and his inattention to style occasion fre¬ quently a two-fold obscurity; he being often too concise % to be understood, except hy those to whom he immedi¬ ately wrote; and not seldom, on the other hand, so full of his subject, as to produce long and difficult parenthe¬ sis, and a repetition of the same word, even in different senses. With a talent for irony and satire, he unites the most refined sensibility, amd tempers the severity of his censures by expressions of tenderness and affection; nor does he ever forget, in the vehemence of his zeal, the rules of modesty and decorum. He is a writer, in short, of so singular a composition, that it would be difficult to find a rival. That truly sensible and sagacious philoso¬ pher, Locke, was of the same opinion, and contended that St. Paul was without an equal.” From these quotations you may judge of the strength of this argument for the genuineness of the books of the New Testament, and of the able and interesting manner in which it is developed by Michaelis. Maria. It is very true: in reading St. Paul’s Epistles, 66 What is said of the writings of St. John and St. Paul?—67 How does Mr. B. speak of St. Paul’s knowledge of the Old Testament!—68 What is said further of the peculiar traits in his style 1—69 What does Maria say of St. Paul’s epistles'! EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 143 I could not think them otherwise than his own real let¬ ters, if I were to try to do so. .Mr. B. And it is equally difficult to imagine the Gos¬ pels written by any others than eye-witnesses of what they related, or by those who put down what eye-wit¬ nesses related to them. Those who read the New Tes¬ tament much, cannot be infidels, unless the mind be alto¬ gether vitiated. But when do unbelievers ever give it a fair chance? Edward. You have not yet brought forward any argu¬ ment from the general agreement of the New Testament with other writers. Mr. B. I could not thence immediately infer the genu¬ ineness of the books, since an impostor might take care not to deviate from facts already known; but from unde¬ signed agreement of these different portions of their writ¬ ings with each other, and with known history, an argu¬ ment irresistibly strong may be drawn in their favour. Maria. What is meant by undesigned agreement? Mr. B. If agreement subsists between two documents, it must be either the effect of design or not. If the agreement be evident, it is not improbably the effect of design; and we may have some reason, where additional suspicious circumstances are connected with it, to infer the probability of forgery; but no person attempting to palm spurious documents upon the world as genuine, would omit to make evident, in some degree, an agree¬ ment which would contribute to their reputation, since it would be useless making a coincidence of this nature un^ less it were apparent. But in the New Testament we have instances of coincidence and agreement which are by no means evident, and in fact so far from it, that the agreement is only ascertained after considerable re¬ search: in some cases even there has appeared, for a long time, contradiction, instead of agreement. Now his could not possibly occur if these books were other¬ wise than genuine; for no forger would leave difficulties 70 What does Mr. B. say of the gospels, as to their authorship”?—71 From what does he say, in this place, that an argument irresistibly strong may be drawn”?—72 What does he say of undesigned agreement”?—73 .Vhere have we instances of it”? 144 CONVERSATIONS ON THE likely to overthrow the credit of his forgery; no forger would fail to make the fact observable which gave credit to his statements. Maria. And can many instances of undesigned coinci¬ dence be produced? Mr. B. You will find some most convincing examples in Marsh’s Lectures, and in the Translation of Michae- lis, taken from the Gospels and the Acts; and Dr. Paley composed a book, entitled Hone Paulinae, entirely on this subject, in which, by comparing the life of St. Paul, given in the Acts of the Apostles with his epistles, he proves that both must have been genuine, and independ¬ ent of each other, neither the epistles having been com¬ piled from the life, nor the life from the epistles. This work of Paley’s is also peculiarly valuable, inasmuch as the argument is quite independent of all- others, assuming merely the existence of the books at the present time. Maria. Will you give some examples of this kind of agreement? Mr. B. From the very nature of it, the developement of this kind of proof would occupy more time than we can give to it; but the following may give you some idea of it: In the third chapter of St. Luke’s Gospel, John the Baptist is mentioned as giving advice to those who came to him for baptism, and, amongst others, to soldiers, when the Greek word is not that ordinarily employed, but one denoting soldiers then engaged in actual service; and for this no reason can be assigned from St. Luke. Again, in the sixth chapter of St. Mark’s Gospel we have an account of the death of John the Baptist, and what renders the circumstance singular is, that the order was given by Herod, at an entertainment at which He- rodias, with her daughter was present, and the execu¬ tioner was not in a civil but a military capacity; but no further light is thrown upon this peculiarity of expres¬ sion. 74 Which are the firot two works named containing examples 1—75 What is said of Paley’s Horae Paulinas'?—76 What is the example given from the third chapter of St. Luke’s gospel?—77 What one is giveu from the sixth chapter of St. Mark’s gospel? EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 145 In the fifth chapter of the eighteenth book of the Jew¬ ish Antiquities of Josephus we however meet with the reason; for we thence learn, that Herod then inarched through the very country where John was baptising, which explains the peculiarity of St. Luke’s expression; and of that war Herodius was the cause, which accounts for her presence at the entertainment, and this also was given at the place where Herod shut up John in prison, Machaerus, a fortress on the eastern side of Jordan, and hence it naturally followed that the executioner was such as described by St. Mark. Now if these gospels had not been genuine documents, it is the most improbable thing in the world that the au¬ thors of them should have been so scrupulously accurate as to use precisely the right expressions; but if they had done so, it is wholly inconceivable that they would leave them unexplained, with an appearance of inaccuracy, when by a further statement they might have so strongly recommended the correctness of their accounts. Maria. And but for the help of Josephus it could never have been explained. Mr. B. You will find the other instances not less in¬ teresting. I shall now give you Paley’s observations upon the proof derived from the comparison of the Acts of the Apostles with the epistles. “ St. Paul’s epistles are connected with the history by their particularity, and by the numerous circumstances which are found in them. When we descend to an examination and comparison of these circumstances, we not only observe the history and the epistles to be independent documents unknown to, or at least unconsulted by, each other, but we find the substance, and oftentimes very minute articles of the his¬ tory recognised in the epistles by allusions and referen¬ ces, which can. neither be imputed to design, nor, without a foundation of truth, be accounted for by accident, by hints and expressions and single words, dropping, as it 78 How are these two case? explained by reference to the book of Jew¬ ish antiquities!—79 What conclusion is drawn from these two cases'!— 80 What does Maria say of them!—81 What are the remarks from Paley upon the proof derived from the comparison of the Acts of the Apostles with the epistles! 13 146 CONVERSATIONS ON THE were, fortuitously from the pen of the writer, or drawn forth each by some occasion proper to the place in ivhich it occurs, but widely removed from any view to consistency or agree¬ ment. These we know are effects which reality naturally produces, but which, without reality at the bottom, can hardly be conceived to exist.”— Hor. Paid. p. 355. Edward. So that it is in the total absence of all appear¬ ance of design, and the minute agreement only detected by diligent examination, that the real strength of the ar¬ gument consists? Mr. B. It is: and you will find the conviction produced by examination of this kind so strong, that no sophistry on the part of infidelity can shake it. But there is yet another argument which must be produced, and which seems as decidedly to exclude the possibility of imposi¬ tion in the external evidence as this does in the internal. With regard to the books of the New Testament, some books were universally received, no doubt having ever attached to them. “ These books were, the four Gos¬ pels, the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen Epistles of St. Paul, the First Epistle of St. Peter, and the First Epistle of St. John. That all these books had been universally received, is a fact attested by Eusebius, and confirmed by the writers who preceded him. Now, if the historical books of the New Testament were universally received, they must have been received as authentic in the very places where they were composed, and by the persons to whom they were first delivered. And whatever apostolic epistles were universally received, they must have been received as authentic by the very persons or communities to whom they were immediately addressed.”— Marsh’s Led. part v. p. 47. But this reduces the whole almost to a matter of de¬ monstration in favour of their genuineness, as Bishop Marsh proceeds to show by examining each case in de¬ tail ; for it is next to impossible that the Christian com- 82 How does Edward express himself upon these remarks of Paley!— 83 How does Mr. B. estimate this kind of evidence!—84 What does Marsh say of the universal reception of many of the books of the New Testament!—85 On what ground does Mr. B. think tlte whole subject is now placed! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 147 munities at Rome, Corinth, in Galatia, at Ephesus, Phi¬ lippi, Colosse, and Thessalonica, could be imposed upon. These epistles are abundantly quoted in the middle of the second century, and partially so in the works assign¬ ed to the apostolic fathers at its commencement. They were, therefore, no secret, and a considerable time must have elapsed ere they could have spread so widely," and that, within so very short a time of the death of St. Paul as this brings us to, specious documents should impose upon all the Christians, without any exception, that every one of these cities should be deceived, is wholly incredi¬ ble. Some trace of doubt must have remained in case of imposture. And now take the whole cumulative weight in favour of the genuineness of these documents togeth¬ er; consider the circumstances under which they are transmitted to us; the deep interest the Christians had at stake; their sincerity, proved in death; their means of ascertaining the truth; the care they took in so do¬ ing; their full testimony; the very nature of the docu¬ ments as Christian Laws demanding obedience; the high reverence paid them as inspired; and that they received that obedience and reverence in places also where im¬ posture could most easily have been detected;—consider again, the language of these writings; the peculiar style of each author; the character of the author as manifested from them; their agreement with fact, and with each other; their having never yet been proved spurious, not¬ withstanding the extent of subject they embrace; the persons who have studied them, and the time which has elapsed, and their undesigned coincidence;—and you must conclude they are the productions of those whose names they bear. 86 What is said of these epistles in the second century 1—87 What cir¬ cumstances, in conclusion, does he think, if taken into consideration, will lead to the most decided conviction in favour of their authenticity 1 148 CONVERSATIONS ON THE CONVERSATION X. # Mr. B. As the greatest stress will be laid upon the genuineness of the books of the New Testament, if you have any objection to make to the conclusion drawn in our last conversation, you must state it now. Maria. I cannot see how that conclusion can be evaded. Edward. Nor I; unless it be on the grounds that we have no account of these authors by contemporaries. Mr. B. I might have recourse to the works of the apos¬ tolic fathers to answer this objection; but as some doubt is attached to the genuineness of the writings ascribed to them, I shall not. On what grounds, however, do you believe that such men as Caesar and Cicero lived, and wrote the books commonly ascribed to them? Edward. There are accounts of them by contempora¬ ry writers, and their works have been transmitted to us as genuine by those who must have been able to decide. The testimony of Sallust alone would be sufficient to es¬ tablish the fact. , Mr. B. But how would you establish the existence of Sallust, and the genuineness of the works ascribed to him? Edxcard. By similar means. Mr. B. Then are you not placed in the same situation with regard to Cicero, Caesar, and Sallust, as we are with regard to the writers of the New Testament? Edward. Not exactly; for the books of the New Tes¬ tament all form one system of religion, the parts of which might naturally be expected to support each other. Mr. B. But would not the same argument have ap¬ plied to the Roman authors just mentioned, had it be¬ come expedient to unite their works in a similar manner? 1 How is the tenth conversation introduced!—2 In what further way does Mr. B. think that the genuineness of the books of the New Testa¬ ment can be established!—3 How should we be enabled to believe such men as Caesar and Cicero have lived!—4 And how would the existence be established!—5 What question does Mr. B. now ask Edward respect¬ ing Caesar, Cicero, and Sallust!—6 What reply does Edward make to this question!—7 How does Mr. B. reply to this supposed want of anal¬ ogy in the two cases! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 149 The New Testament is now regarded as one work; but you must always bear in mind, that it is, in fact, a col¬ lection of the works of eight authors, and that these writ¬ ings are asserted to have been produced in different coun¬ tries, with different objects; and that it was only the im¬ mense weight attached to their authority which occasion¬ ed their being collected and separated so decisively from all other works as we now see them. Edward. But is it not assuming too much that they certainly are the works of different authors? Mr. B. Would you believe that Sallust wrote the va¬ rious works of Cicero and the Commentaries of Csesar? Edward. Certainly not: it is impossible. Mr. B. Not more impossible than that St. John should have written the narratives of St. Luke, St. Matthew, and St. Mark, the Epistles of St. Peter, St. Paul, St, James, and St. Jude. If the unanimous testimony of all subsequent writers establish the facts in the one case, so they do in the other; if the internal evidence makes the idea of forgery absurd in the one case, so it does in the other. Edicard. But Cicero is an author sui generis; no one but Cicero could have written the works ascribed to him. Mr. B. And so is St. Paul an author sui generis; and the impossibility attached to the forgery of works ascrib¬ ed to him is as evident as that in a similar supposition with regard to the works of Cicero. Maria. In both cases, it appears we know nothing of the authors, but by the belief of those who lived subse¬ quently to them, and through the examination of the ac¬ counts of those said to be contemporaries, and of the works said to be theirs. Edivard. But the Roman orator acted so distinguished a part, that no doubt can attach to him. Mr. B. And did Paul of Tarsus do less? According 8 Edward inquires if his position is not assuming too much-—What is the answer of Mr. B.!—9 Edward admits it would be impossible to be¬ lieve that Sallust wrote the works of Cicero, and the Commentaries of Caesar, how does Mr. B. use this admission!—10 Edward says that Cicero is ar. author sui generis, how does Mr. B. answer him!—11 What does Maria say pf the manner in which we acquire knowledge in each of these two cases! 13 * CONVERSATIONS ON THE 150 to the most favourable hypothesis that can be framed for you, all the natural advantages were on the side of Ci¬ cero. But look at the results. The Jew holds the world in subjection; the greatest admirers of the Roman are compelled to acknowledge his insufficiency. St. Paul’s works cannot be overthrown; those of Cicero, with all their learning, all their genius, all their charms of style, can hardly be made even plausible, as respects religion. And can you believe that writings which have produced such effects are mere fictions'? Is it credible, that what Porphyry and Julian could not shake is reserved for our days to overthrow; when, according to the principles of those who wish to invalidate the arguments for the gen¬ uineness of the Scriptures, the interval of time which has elapsed since their promulgation, is the great obstacle to ascertaining the truth? Edivard. But all the evidence in behalf of the genu- inenes of these works, nearest the time of their publica¬ tion, is to be found in the writings of those who were bound to support them. Mr. B. Whence could the evidence arise, if not from thence? Are a man’s friends, or his enemies, those to whom he chiefly writes? By whom can the fact of a let¬ ter’s having been written be established, but by those to whom it is addressed, and are best acquainted with the writer? What fuller proof can be given of their belief in its genuineness, than obedience to its injunctions, at the risk of loss of property, liberty, and even life itself; when those injunctions also are of a nature contrary to former habits, opinions, and inclinations? Maria. The evidence, indeed, as derived from the re¬ ception of St. Paul’s letters in the cities to which they are addressed, is to me irresistible; for I can never be¬ lieve they could have been received there as of divine authority, had it not been a certain fact, that they had ! 12 What comparison does Mr. B. introduce between the Roman orator and Cicero 1 —13 What question does he then ask, mentioning the names of Porphyry and Julian 1—14 From what source does Edward say that the evidence arises i.ri behalf of the genuineness of the New Testament!— 15 How does Mr. B. reply to him!—16 What is the opinion of Maria on this point! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 151 really been sent by St. Paul, and known to be his, by those in whose hands they first appeared. The time also is too limited for deception to have been practised Mr. B. Tertullian made use of this very argument, and insists upon the fact of the “ authentic letters ” exist¬ ing in these cities, which, whatsoever meaning be attach¬ ed to the words, must imply the fact of there being no doubt in those cities. In the epistles ascribed to the apostolic fathers, addressed to the cities themselves, we have also reference to this fact, which reference could never have been made by any author, if that had not been the case. Edivard. With regard to the Epistles of St. Paul and the Acts of the Apostles, it does not appear possible cer¬ tainly to have any doubt as to their genuineness; but with regard to the Gospels, I should like to have had more information. Mr, B. But if the “ Acts of the Apostles” be genuine, the Gospel of St. Luke, of which it is only a continua¬ tion, must be so likewise; and from the works of St. Luke and St. Paul we obtain sufficient information by which tor try the genuineness of the other authors. We learn from St. Paul, that Peter, and James, and John, were pillars of the church; from St. Luke, the character of St. Matthew; and from both, that of St. Mark. Be¬ sides this, we have the authority of those who best knew the truth, for saying that the Gospel of St. Mark was de¬ rived from the statements of St. Peter, as that of St. Luke was sanctioned by St. Paul. Those of St. Mat¬ thew and St. John stand upon their own independent au¬ thority. But the agreement between the various writ¬ ings ascribed to St. John, fully confirms the fact of their having proceeded from the same author: and when we consider that not the shadow of doubt ever existed as to . the Gospel and the First Epistle; and that Irenmus, who derived his information from Polycarp, the disciple of Si. 17 What is stated of Tertullian in relation to this matter!—18 What admission does Edward make in relation to the epistles of St. Paul, and the Acts of the Apostles'?—19 What do we learn from the works of St. Luke and St. Paul?—20 What is said of the Gospels of St. Mark, St. Matthew, and St. John?—21 And of the writings of St. John in particular 11 f 52 CONVERSATION'S ON THE John, expressly assigns to him the Apocalypse; and that the two short epistles, being private, could not be ex¬ pected to be universally received at once, but yet when known were received; you cannot doubt of the genuine¬ ness of the books ascribed to this apostle. Maria. He also lived longer than the rest, so that the less chance remained for imposition. Mr. B. That St. John lived to the end of the first cen¬ tury has been so long acknowledged, that he must be sceptical indeed who would now call it in question; and the works ascribed to him, (particularly the Gospel, which is, in our inquiry, of the greatest importance) con¬ tain such abundant internal evidence of genuineness, in addition to external testimony, that there seems no evad¬ ing the conclusion, that they were written by the “ be¬ loved disciple.” Edrvard. But may we not suppose that the Gospel of St. Matthew was written by some other person about the time, and circumstances generally known and assigned to him, in order to give it authority? Mr, B. The Hebrew Gospel of St. Matthew is sup¬ posed to have been written in the year 37; and the Greek translation, which we now have, probably appeared about the year 63. Now if the Gospel of St. Matthew was not written by the apostle, it must either have been done by one believing the events to have occurred, and, through earnest desire to advance the belief of them, induced to do that in itself wrong, for the sake of advancing what he believed to be a great good; or by one who disbe¬ lieved the facts, but was desirous, by means of them, to establish his own opinions. Now, in either case, the author would be most anxious to finish his production to the utmost degree, in order that the deception might not be discovered, and, at the same time, be very careful where he first produced it; Edward. As far as possible, he would put it out of the 22 And of the time when he lived'?—23 And of the internal evidence of the genuineness of his writings?—24 What question did Edward ask respecting the Gospel of S4. Matthew?—25 What is said of the time of writing St. Matthew’s Gospel?—26 What supposition is made by Mr. B. as to the authorship of it?—27 What does Edward say of this supposition! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. m power of any one to expose the weakness of its claims or the falsity of its contents. Mr. B. Yet this Gospel unquestionably first appeared in the country where the supposed author was best known, and where the events related had occurred, and at a time when the assigned author, if not alive, could only have been dead a very short time. Would a person capable of such a forgery have been so imprudent, and, when so little scrupulous about the means of promulgating his opinions, so careless in his choice of means ? But in what manner would a forger of such a document write, as respected common prejudices and opinions? Maria. Very carefully, of course; since otherwise he would excite many enemies, at a time when any one en¬ emy would be of serious consequence. Mr. B. Yet look at the Gospel itself. Can any thing be more bold or decisive? If not genuine, what induce¬ ment could there be needlessly to irritate so many pow¬ erful parties in Judea, by the strong language put into the mouth of our Lord? There is no quarter given to the follies, the vices, and the prejudices of those of his own nation; no leaning toward any party; no attempt to make any set of men (able to defend him) his friends; no attempt to interest national pride in his defence. He speaks as one having authority, as calling for investiga¬ tion. Maria. There must have been motives to attempt de¬ tection, as well as means of so doing, in case of forgery. Mr. B. There must; yet there is no fear of consequen¬ ces, no careful guarding of his statements, by throwing them into the obscurity of distance of time, or remoteness of situation. There is no endeavour at plausibility, the narrative being given in all the hardihood, all the care¬ lessness commonly accompanying truth; with parts ap¬ parently objectionable, unexplained allusions, and every portion bearing the strongest marks of original authorship. 28 What other supposition does Mr. B. make as to the authorship of this gospel"?—29 What question does he ask on the presumption that this gospel is not genuine"?—£0 What facts does he state of it inconsistent with such a presumption"?—81 What characteristics of style run through the whole of it"? CONVERSATIONS ON THE 154 Edward. It is indeed like any thing rather than the careful compiling and studied arrangement of an impos¬ tor. Mr. B. If we had only this one narrative, we could not account for its production on any other supposition than that it was written by a Jew who lived before the destruc¬ tion of Jerusalem, who was a firm believer in the divine mission of Jesus of Nazareth, and thought it his duty to declare (let the consequences be what they might) the things which he had seen and heard. It is so completely Jewish in language, style, and thought, the author is so wholly absorbed in the things which he is relating, and the whole turn and character of the work is such, that none but a Jew could have written it; and yet there are parts of it so contrary to Judaism, that no Jew ever would have written it, but an apostle of Christ. From St. Paul’s Epistles and the Acts we see the great difficulty there was to get over Jewish prejudices; and from the works of the Jews themselves we know these prejudices are not over-rated by the sacred writers. Nothing short of the genuineness of the Gospel can account for its contents; it is so totally at variance with all the wishes, habits of thinking, and prejudices of the Jews. None but an apostle would ever have entertained the idea of preach¬ ing Jesus of Nazareth, the crucified, as the Messiah; and, if an apostle, it would be folly to assign any other than St. Matthew. Maria. It is indeed possible to fancy the author deceiv-- ed: but I think most persons would do violence to their natural feelings in believing the author a deceiver. Edward. After all, the universal testimony of the church cannot be disregarded for mere conjecture, and particularly when every particle of internal evidence is against that conjecture. Mr. B. I shall only add a few observations more on these books, viz. that every thing in them confirms the 32 If we had only this one narrative, what does he say of it!—33 Why could a Jew alone have written it!—34 What do we see from St. Paul’s epistles and the Acts!—35 What does Maria think possible in relation to this matter!—36 What does Edward say of the universal testimony of the church!—37 For whom were the Gospels severally written! lad EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. statements given by the fathers, as to the circumstances under which they were written. St. Matthew is said to have been writer of the first, for the use of the Jewish converts in Palestine; St. Mark, for the converts at Rome; St. Luke, for those in Greece; and St. John’s, the last, as supplementary to the rest. Now, on exam¬ ination, every thing appears in strict accordance with this statement. St. Matthew selects those subjects most interesting to the Jews; St. Luke gives details.necessary for the Gentiles; St. Matthew speaks of things as well known and common, of which St. Mark gives explana¬ tions, which at Rome were necessary; and St. John seems carefully to have avoided the subjects they had discussed, except where his testimony was necessary to leading facts of great importance, and to have dwelt more at large upon those conversations of our Lord with his disciples and with the Jews, which were most interesting and necessary at the time he wrote. He also gives ob¬ servations of his own, explanatory of the rejection of our Lord by the Jews, which throw light upon the conduct of our Lord towards them, and through the whole narra¬ tive seems to dwell upon the character of our Lord with that interest which we might have expected from “ the disciple whom Jesus loved.” Edward. These may not add much to the evidence before considered, but they connect the external with the internal evidence. Mr. B. Again, if we found the Gospels according to St. Matthew and St. Mark excelling the others in purity of style and freedom from Orientalisms, we should have some reason to question the accuracy of the statements which have come down to us. If the works of St. Luke were remarkable for the total want of any thing like the style of one who had travelled and resided in Greece, or retained no Hebraisms, we might doubt whether they were the productions of the companion of St. Paul. If the Gospel of St. John were grossly inaccurate, as to its 38 Of the subjects contained in them respectively, what is said!—39 What observations of his own did St. John give!—40 What would lead us to doubt respecting the genuineness of the first three gospels'!—41 And respecting the authorship of St. John’s Gospel! 156 CONVERSATIONS ON THE Greek construction, on the one hand, or entirely free from all mixture of the dialects of the East, on the other, we might in either case hesitate before we received it as the work of a Jew who had for many years resided in Asia Minor. But in all these instances the very reverse is true; and the Gospels are, in language as well as in matter, such as might reasonably have been expected from persons situated as St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke, and St. John, are said to have been. Maria. But might not the accounts of the authors have arisen from observation of these things? Mr. B. They are not so stated, and it is very improb¬ able that this should have been the case, since the Gos¬ pels were not at first in one volume, and did not there¬ fore afford the means of the comparison which we now readily make; nor have we the least reason to believe that such careful observation of the style was ever made by those who have given the above statements; for the first Christians were too much occupied with things to attend much to words. The idea of proving the truth of Christianity from internal evidence, as we now do, could hardly then be said to exist; and it was not needed by those who possessed a much readier method, from their living so near the apostolic times. Edward. As the genuineness of the greater part of the New Testament appears quite certain, it perhaps is not very material to establish that of the books which at first were not universally received; but is there sufficient rea¬ son to believe these also are genuine? Mr. B. Abundantly sufficient, though not to as great an extent as in the case of the rest. The Epistle to the Hebrews was for a time rejected by the 'Latin church, but was always received by the Greek, and is by Clem¬ ent of Alexandria ascribed to St. Paul, who appeals also to Pantrenus, his preceptor. It is also in the Syriac ver¬ sion; and thus we have in its favour the testimony of all those countries which were best situated for the determi¬ nation of the truth. The Epistle of St. James being like- 42 What question does Maria ask on the subject?—43 How does Mr. B. reply to her?—44 What question relating to another subject does Ed¬ ward ask?—45 Of the Epistle to the Hebrews what is said? EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITT. 157 wise in the Syriac version, must be received as his; that version of course having the greatest weight in a ques¬ tion of this kind, from its antiquity, and the situation of the Syrian Christians with respect to Judea. The Sec¬ ond Epistle of St. Peter, the Second and Third of St. John, and the Epistle of St. Jude, are not in the Syriac version, which may reasonably be accounted for, from its having been made before these epistles were known. The Second Epistle of St. Peter has such strong internal evidence of its genuineness, as proved by comparison with the First, which is undoubtedly genuine, that it must be received. The three other epistles are so very short, and their nature is such, that it is not at ail surprising that they were for a time unnoticed, particularly the two former; hut these so closely resemble the First Epistle of St. John, that there can be little doubt as to their gen¬ uineness; and the Epistle of St. Jude, when known, was received as his, being quoted as such both by Clement of Alexandria and Origen. The book of Revelation is also quoted frequently by Clement of Alexandria and Origen, and likewise by Irenseus. It is also expressly ascribed to St. John by the latter (whose testimony is of the greatest weight with regard to it) as before seen, and by Justin Martyr at a still earlier period. The de¬ fence of Christianity may be maintained without depend¬ ing upon any of these books; but there is no necessity to give up their authority, since the evidence for their genuineness is far greater than what would be deemed necessary to establish the credit of any common author. CONVERSATION XI. Mr. B. We are now arrived at that part of the evi¬ dences of Christianity to which the greatest interest is generally attached, and on which indeed the whole proof 46 Of the Epistle of James; of the second Epistle of Peter; of the third Epistle of John; and of the Epistle of Jude, what is said?—47 Of the Other epistles, what is said?—48 Of the book of Revelation, what is said* l To what part of the argument are we new arrived! 14 CONVERSATIONS ON THE .108 of Christianity seems to depend—the credibility of the New Testament. If the accounts of our Lord Jesus Christ be not true, however excellent Christianity may appear, and however singular may be the fact of its con¬ tinuance to the present day, we can only regard it as the effect of a variety of concurring causes, which it may be interesting, but cannot be absolutely necessary to inves¬ tigate; and here, therefore, we may terminate our in¬ quiries. But if, on the other hand, the New Testament be credible as well as genuine, the truth of Christianity is established, and the remainder of our inquiries may be restricted to showing how far this fact affects others con¬ nected with it, or is itself affected by them. Edward. Do you then consider the whole question as turning upon this one point? Mr. B. I do. If Christ be not risen from the dead, all probabilities in favour of Christianity must fail: if he is risen from the dead, they are unnecessary. Edward. Do you then consider all the internal evi¬ dence in behalf of Christianity, arising from its excel¬ lence, as useless? Mr. B. By no means: it is of the greatest consequence; but the utmost which it can establish, independently of external evidence, is, that the religion is not (according to our notions), unworthy of God. Maria. Has it not been denied by some, that the Gos¬ pel statements can be proved true by any means whatso¬ ever ? Mr. B. It has, from the circumstance of their relating miracles. Maria. And what is the argument made use of? If it be valid, all further inquiry is needless. Mr. B. It is this ,—that a miracle is contrary to our experience, and therefore no testimony, however strong, can establish it. The fallacy of the argument consists in the ambiguity of the word experience. It may be certain 2 If the accounts of our Lord be not true, what is the supposition of Mr. B.!—But if the New Testament be credible, as well as genuine, what is the fact'!—4 What importance is attached to the resurrection of our Lord from the deadl—5 What does Mr. B. say of the excellence of Christian¬ ity!—6 What objection is made to miracles! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 159 that a miracle is contrary to our own personal experience; but to say that it is contrary to universal experience, is what can never be proved, and is assuming the very question at issue. To prove that a miracle never did occur, would require a knowledge which man cannot possess. Maria. This is a very contemptible method of quib¬ bling upon a serious subject. Mr. B. It is, and as such I shall not dwell further upon it. In Leland’s £C Deistical Writers” you will find some observations on the subject, and in “ Beattie’s Essay on Truth,” “Campbell on Miracles,” and “Douglas on Miracles,” sufficient answers to the objection. In the beginning of Paley’s Evidences, you will find some ad¬ mirable observations on the same subject. Edivard. But I have met with another objection that seems much more formidable, which is, “ that we can never certainly know what is a miracle and what is not; for a miracle is a deviation from the accustomed course of things, and we are not sufficiently acquainted with the laws of nature to determine when the law is broken.” Mr. B. This is one of the many instances in which it is attempted to explain away common sense by metaphys¬ ical refinement, and respecting which I again tefer you to Beattie. Suppose we do not know every thing relative to the ordinary course of all things, does it follow that our knowledge is so circumscribed that we cannot in some determine as to whether the general course is observed or broken? An astronomer observes the course of a planet, and determines the law by which that course is directed. He afterwards obtains better instruments, and by fresh observations ascertains that the course is not such as he had before concluded it to be. He examines his calculations, but can detect no error, and is thereby perplexed. He does not thence infer there is a miracle, and justly, because he is aware that he is not acquainted with every thing relative to the subject. Perhaps at a 7 In what does the fallacy of this objection consist 1 ?—8 In what works does a sufficient answer to it exist?—9 What other objection does Edward bring forward?—10 How does Mr. B. speak of this objection?—11 How does he illustrate his meaning by a case of astronomy? 160 CONVERSATIONS ON THE subsequent period he detects the cause of the deviations from what appeared to be the natural course dictated by the general law of attraction, to be latent in the univer¬ sality of that law affecting other bodies, which he had before neglected to take into the account. But what analogy is there between this and the case of a man born blind suddenly restored to sight; a cripple suddenly restored to the use of his limbs; or of a man, who had died some days before, arising from the grave, on being commanded so to do? I do not know every thing rela¬ tive to the human body, and the changes it may undergo from various causes; but I do know sufficient to inform me that the sound of the human voice has no power over the “ dull cold ear of death.” I do not know every thing relative to the nature of water; but I do know that simi¬ lar bodies similarly situated will be affected in the like manner by the same causes; and that if on the sea of Galilee Peter was sinking at the time his Master walked upon it, that undoubtedly there was a suspension of the accustomed course of nature. Maria. I do not think my brother’s objection much better than the first. Edward. But if a deviation from a law of nature take place, it must require amazingly strong evidence to prove it, Mr. B. The whole resolves itself into a question of probabilities, and as such it ought to be considered; viz. whether it is more probable that the miracle has taken place, or that those who bear witness to it are deceivers or deceived? Maria. But, from the nature of the miracles you have just now cited in illustration, there appears no chance of deception. Mr. B. There can be very little; but however we will consider both cases. Now, with regard to the miracles of the New Testament, their probability rests upon the following probabilities;—that they cannot be disproved; 12 What application does he make of this case to the argument against miracles'?—13 What additional illustration does he make in the case of Peter?—14 Into what does he say that the whole resolves itself?—15 Up¬ on what probabilities do the miracles of the New Testament rest? EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 161 that the witnesses of them were not deceivers; that they were not deceived; that the cause of the performance of these miracles was such as made the interposition of Di¬ vine power necessary or expedient. Maria. The reason of the three first I see, but not of the last. Mr. B. A miracle may be said to have been wrought, ■which I cannot disprove, and which is well attested, but which does not affect me; but the miracles of the New Testament are expressly given as proofs of the divine origin of the religion therein taught; and therefore I must be quite certain of their connexion with God, and must be convinced that they are in agreement with what I know of him. If I found the reverse the case, I should conclude that there was a defect in some part or other of the preceding proof, though f' might not be able to de¬ tect it; in the same manner that an absurd conclusion in mathematics is allowed to overthrow a theory, however plausible, which has led to it. Edward. Before we examine the miracles, will it not be as well to examine the credibility of the other parts of the New Testament? since, if we detect falsehood in common things, it is not unreasonable to distrust state¬ ments of extraordinary events. Mr. B. Certainly; and first, then, I observe, that with regard to all the leading facts, not miraculous, the state¬ ments of the New Testament were allowed by those who were able to have detected falsehood, had it existed, and who were most anxious to destroy their credit. From the enemies of Christianity, and its most bitter antago¬ nists, we may prove the credibility of the New Testament. Celsus, Porphyry, and Julian, must have had the power to detect any gross falsehood; and who that looks at the remains of their works can doubt their anxiety to over¬ throw Christianity? But again, the leading facts have never been disputed. 16 What does Maria say of these probabilities'?—17 How does Mr. B. reply to her remark?—IS What does Edward propose to examine before the miracles, and why?—10 How, in the first place, is the credibility of the New Testament to be proved?—20 What is said of the existence of Pagauism, Mahometanism, and Judaism, as affecting this argument? CONVERSATIONS ON THE 162 Paganism did not become extinct till the sixth century, and with the seventh.arose Mahometanism: Judaism never was extinct; yet not one of these three bodies of adversaries have disproved the facts. It was reserved for those of later time to become sceptical upon these points. Maria. This is, however, only a general and negative argument in favour of their veracity. Mr. B. Let us then descend to particulars, and exam¬ ine them in those points where we have most informa¬ tion from their adversaries, and the truth may positively be ascertained. It is not uncommon for rational and re¬ ligious prejudices very materially to warp the mind. What accounts, then, do the New Testament writers give of themselves and others,—and how far do these agree with the statements" of their adversaries? Now, with regard to the Jews, look at their own books, their favourite authors, and you will find the nation was not in the least different from the accounts given of them by the-writers of the New Testament. Or if you turn from these to Josephus, whom they now abhor, is his account any better? Or do the Pagans give a more fa¬ vourable account of this proud and bigoted nation? Again, with regard to the Pagans, St. Paul’s state¬ ments, strong as they are, do not go beyond those of their own writers, and even to the finer shades we find the same scrupulous accuracy. Or take the characters of individuals described by both parties. Do the accounts of Herod, Pilate, Agrippa, Felix, and others differ from those of Josephus and the Roman tvriters who have mentioned them? Edward. And in all these instances prejudice would be likely to influence them. Mr. B. Again, with regard to themselves, in no re¬ spects do they appear to over-rate the character or influ- 21 How does Mr. B. propose to vary the argument 1 ?—22 How does he show that the New Testament account of the Jews is correct 1 ?—23 What is said of the New Testament account of the Pagans?-^-24 What cases of individuals are named ;rn further proof of the same trait in the New Test¬ ament account of character?—25 How does Edward speak of these in¬ stances?—26 How do tiie writers of the New Testament speak of them¬ selves? 163 VlDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. ence of their converts, in order to magnify their own importance. Pliny, you have seen, bears witness to the purity of their conduct; nor do any other accounts ena¬ ble us to detect false statements in this respect. Edward. Still these are in some respects general state¬ ments also: are they found equally correct in minutiae? Mr. B. In general we find an accuracy of fact, and sometimes with an appearance of carelessness in expres¬ sion, which is strongly corroborative of their veracity. To give one example,—St. Luke speaks of Sergius Pau- lus as proconsul of Cyprus. Now Strabo and Dio ex¬ pressly state that Cyprus was a praetorian and not a pro¬ consular province: and till very lately it was supposed, on their authority, that St. Luke was incorrect; but clos¬ er investigation has proved his accuracy in this respect, a coin having been found, bearing an inscription, in which the very term used by St. Luke occurs. We find similar accuracy wherever the scene of action is laid. Now even a learned man, however well informed on general topics, could hardly have preserved uniform ac¬ curacy in all points of a work of fiction on so extended-a scale; and the most consummate art would be requisite to preserve it with that appearance of freedom and care¬ lessness observable in these books. Maria. If the apostles had not really lived and travel¬ led as they profess to have done, it is then most improba¬ ble that they would have adhered to truth so closely, or indeed have been informed of facts so minute, as to es¬ cape the observation of more learned men. Mr. B. In the narratives of the Gospels, there is the same propriety of expression with regard to things purely local, which at least fully proves that the whole was so familiar to the writer’s mind, that he naturally made use of proper and determinate expressions. Palestine to this day remains an evidence for the veracity of the evangel- 27 What case of St. Luke’s great accuracy is •given'?— 28 Ts there a similar degree of accuracy in other parts of the New Testament'?— 29 What conclusion does-Maria draw from this accuracy in the statement of facts'?_ 30 What does Mr. B. say of the narratives of the Gospels gene¬ rally, and of Palestine in particular, in relation to the same subject"? 164 CONVERSATIONS ON THE ists,—-a noble evidence, whose testimony cannot be si¬ lenced or misrepresented. Maria. But if we find them correct with regard to his¬ torical and geographical minutiae, we must conclude that they were writing altogether what was true; or that they were engaged in compiling a laboured, false account with the greatest care, and affecting accuracy in some things, the truth of which could be ascertained, that they might be the more readily believed in others, when this was not the case. Mr. B. Yet nothing can be more contrary to matter of fact than the latter supposition; for from one end to the other common facts are mentioned with the greatest in¬ difference, or merelv alluded to so as to connect the nar¬ rative of the life of their Master with the history of the times, and enable all, by the mention of time and place, to ascertain the reality of the extraordinary occurrences on which their attention was fixed. There is no effort in the Gospels, no display; all minor considerations are lost sight of in the greatness of the subject on which the au¬ thors are engaged; and even then, it is not so much the giving a full account of our Lord, as the stating what they themselves knew, as in the case of St. Matthew, and St. John, or of the truth of which they were assured by eye-witnesses, as in the case of St. Luke and St. Mark. Edward. If these writers had to support a false story, it is indeed improbable that they should have thus acted; that they should have neglected to avail themselves of their own advantages, and left themselves exposed to animndversion from the narratives being different. Mr. B. But besides this positive testimony to the ve¬ racity of the evangelists, we must not omit the negative testimony afforded, in that their enemies never denied many things, which, if false, they must have had the 31 What are the two cases supposed by Maria, one of which must be applicable to the writers of these books!—32 What does Mr. B. sav of her latter supposition!—33 How were the authors of the Gospels govern- eb in writing those histories!—34 What does Edward soy, in rel cion to them, is improbable!—35 Besides the positive testimony in favour of th« veracity of the evangelists, what other testimony is there! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 165 power of detecting and exposing. It concerned the whole Jewish nation to show the falsity of the pretensions of him whom they had put to death, to deny or to vindicate the accounts given of the conduct of their rulers, with regard to his crucifixion. It afterwards became a mat¬ ter of the greatest consequence to the Roman empire to decide upon this question. The Christians had increas¬ ed in numbers and influence to a great degree, and per¬ secutions only added to their strength. What then was the direct course to be pursued, if the Christian state¬ ments could be proved false? Certainly to prove that fact. The evangelists had given all the details of the death of the Founder of this religion with the utmost care, and the Christian apologists in later times were ever daring them to the proof. If Pilate never had con¬ demned our Lord to the peculiar kind of death, and un¬ der all the circumstances alleged, why was not the fact disproved ? The Christians justly laid the greatest stress upon the leading events of the life of their Master: that an extraordinary person was at that particular time ex¬ pected to arise, was known throughout the whole of the eastern parts of the empire, and probably in the west also; that the Jews were in full expectation that he was to spring from the house of David, and that the time for his appearance was come, is also known. The full be¬ lief of that nation induced them to brave all the power of the Roman empire, and to the very last they were sanguine in their hopes of the appearance of the Messi- as. Now under the^e circumstances a person did ap¬ pear, whose life so influenced many, that the whole world was shortly after astonished at their boldness, their zeal, and perseverance. There appeared a stronger proba¬ bility every year that they would ultimately succeed; and yet neither Jews nor Romans, though most desirous to crush them, attempted that which would have had the greatest tendency. 36 Who were interested in proving the falsity of Christianity ?—37 How would they probably have proceeded in doing it?—38 On what did Christ¬ ians lay great stress'?— : 39 What was the case of the Jews and of the Ro¬ mans in relation to the establishment of Christianity? 166 CONVERSATIONS ON THE Maria. The New Testament statements have never, then, been shown to be false, as regards our Lord? Mr. B. They have not: and on this I lay the greatest stress; for if there had been the means of proving them false, it is utterly incredible that they should have been acknowledged as true. Maria. But all the New Testament statements have not been acknowledged as true. Mr. B. None have been proved to be false, and some of the greatest importance have been owned true. Edward. What is confessed as true ? Mr. B. It is oivned that Christ worked miracles. Maria. But by whom? Mr. B. Both Jews and Pagans. Maria. But by any near the time of Christ? Mr. B. Even by the first antagonist of his religion, Celsus. Maria. But if he owned the fact, why did he not be¬ come a Christian? Mr. B. Because he absurdly supposed those miracles could have been wrought by magic, which we know they could not. The Jews had the same mode of accounting for them. Now no reasoning upon the subject whatsoever can get over the stubborn fact, that the miracles of Christ were acknowledged by those of his opponents who lived nearest to his time, and had the best means of ascertain¬ ing tne truth. Edward. But if this be admitted, the whole question seems decided. Mr. B. It does not follow, that because enemies as well as friends believed that he worked miracles, that therefore he did: it only follows, that we have no means of proving that he did not, by means of historical testi¬ mony. But unless we find reason to believe, from inter- 1 40 What question does Maria ask respecting the New Testament state¬ ments of our Lord!—41 What reply does Mr. B. make to it!—42 What general remark does he make of the other New Testament accounts'!—43 What is confessed as true 1 ?—44 By whom!—45 At how early a period!— 46 If Celsus admitted the fact, why did he not become a Christian!— 47 What use in the argument can be made of this and other similar admis¬ sions! EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 167 nal evidence, that deception was practised, then we must also conclude that those miracles were really wrought. Edward. And therefore we must examine as to the probability of the apostles having been deceivers. Maria. There can be little chance for any one who now attempts this, since their first enemies could not overthrow those statements in which fraud was most open to detection. Edward. We do not know that the miracles were so open to detection. The leading facts of the life of Christ might be true, exclusively of the miracles; and the mir¬ acles may have been appended to it, to give authority to his precepts. Maria. They may; but from my recollection of them, I do not think it probable; for, though some of them were private, the greater part were public. Edward. But if it was believed that miracles could be performed by the power of magic, they might have been less examined than they ought to have been at the time: the accounts were not published till after his death, and then probably with exaggerations, supposing that preten¬ sions were really made to this power from the very be¬ ginning, which is by no means certain. Mr. B. We will examine, then, into the probability that, the apostles added these miracles, to give authority to the precepts of their Master. If it. be supposed that our Lord Jesus Christ was only a very superior character, who vainly attempted the re¬ formation of the Jewish nation, and was, in consequence, put to death; and this is the only supposition that can be formed by those who admit historical testimony, but are unwilling to acknowledge the performance of miracles; then we must inquire, of what nature was his doctrine and manner of life—how far it would be consistent with 48 What does Maria say as to the apostles having been deceivers'?—49 What relation does Edward think there may have been between the lead¬ ing facts in the life of our Lord, and the miracles?—50 Why does he think the miracles might have been examined less carefully than they should have been?—51 What does Mr. B. propose doing, touching the miracles? —52 What does he say is the only supposition to be made by those who doubt their truth, while they admit historical testimony?—53 If so, what then must be the inquiry? 168 CONVERSATIONS ON THE the allowance of an attempt to deceive for the purposes of general good—and how far it was acted upon by his apostles. Edward. Upon this hypothesis, then, our Lord would be a sort of Jewish Socrates; and his disciples, seeing the bad result of their Master’s attempt to reform his na¬ tion, without the assumption of miraculous powers, after his death gave him that to which he himself made no pretension. Mr. B. Now I think it is quite certain, that, if this had been the case, they would, at least, have made as free with his doctrines, as with his life; for with regard to his precepts, few could detect any false statements; with respect to miracles, they were at the mercy of every enemy. Maria. It certainly seems probable that they would somewhat soften and accommodate their statements to public prejudice. Mr. B. Now what are their doctrines? what are the precepts put into the mouth of their Lord? The world has never seen a stronger expression of detestation of hypocrisy and insincerity, than the whole of these writ¬ ings manifest. With regard to the nature of God, as a Spirit, and with respect to his worshippers, who are to “worship him in spirit and in truth,” the language is uni¬ form and decisive, to so great a degree, as utterly to exclude all idea of the men, who spent their lives in pro¬ mulgating such opinions, entertaining any hope that by deception they could recommend this religion. Of those “ who do evil that good may come,” they teach that “ their damnation is just;” they threaten eternal vengeance against “ all liars and the most terrible miracle re¬ corded in the volume, is connected with “ lying unto the Holy Ghost.” If any fact be certain, this is most surely so, that their professed doctrine did not admit of any thing like deception, even for the most beneficial end. If now 54 What does Edward say results from this hypothesis'?—55 Had this teen the ease, what does Mr; B. think quite certain'!-—56 What do they vay of the nature of God, and of the worship due him'?—57 Against what sins do they denounce Vengeance'?—58 What fact relating to their doctrine does Mr. B. think certain! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 169 a single miracle were disproved, by their own.uniform doctrine they were accursed. Maria. And in those times it was in the power of any one to ascertain the truth, so that they never would have run so great a risk. Mr. B. Now before we consider the miracles related of our Lord, let us refer to those connected with St. Paul. Among the common historical facts which are generally admitted, I think we must admit St. Paul’s defences be¬ fore the sanhedrim, to Felix, and Agrippa. They were public acts, and can no more be denied, than the trials of Archbishop Laud, or Lord William Russell. Now would St. Paul, upon such an occasion, solemnly state the fact of a miraculous interposition from heaven, in the presence of those who undoubtedly could have produced witnesses to prove the contrary, had his statement been false? St. Paul’s previous life was known, as he asserts, to all the Jews; the fact of his conversion was equally notorious. By his change of religion, he made the heavi¬ est charge against the rulers of Judea which could be made against men; and, from the nature of the case, their rage against him must have been excited to the very utmost. Now under these circumstances, I say, that mere madness alone could have prompted his con¬ duct in the first instance in joining the Christians, or, in the second, in adopting such a method of defence, unless the miracle was real. Maria. Festus accused him of madness. Mr. B. And what followed? “ But he said, I am not mad, most noble Festus, but speak forth the words of truth and soberness. For the king knoweth of these things, before whom also I speak freely: for I am per¬ suaded that none of these things are hidden from him; for this thing was not done in a corner. King Agrippa, believest thou the prophets? I know that thou believest. 59 What does Mr,. B. propose doing before considering the miracles?— 60 What important facts in the life of St. Paul are named, and what is said of them?—61 What is said of the probability of such a change in St. Paul’s religion, if the miracle related, connected with his conversion, were not true?—62 What did St. Paul say in reply, when accused of madness by Festus? 15 . CONVERSATIONS ON THE 170 Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian. And Paul said, I would to God that not only thou, but also all that hear me this day, were both almost, and altogether such as I am, except these bonds.”— Acts, xxvi. 25—29. Edward. Festus, in accusing him of madness, imputed it to too much learning. Mr. B. And the whole of St. Paul’s epistles and speech¬ es prove not only his learning, but his “ truth and sober¬ ness.” So long as the writings of St. Paul remain, the infidel will have to acknowledge in them a greater mira¬ cle than the one he seeks to escape, in rejecting the ac¬ count of St. Paul’s conversion. It appears to me abso¬ lutely impossible to account for the difference between St. Paul’s writings, and those of the Jews who lived nearest to his time, upon any other principle than that of a real conversion, occasioned by a real miracle. Why should St. Paul have so differed from others who sat at the feet of Gamaliel ? Why should he, rather than any other, become a martyr to the faith he had before perse¬ cuted? Why should this Jew, rather than any other, from a narrow bigot, become the most active philan¬ thropist the world has yet seen? Why should Paul of Tarsus alone teach truth with a certainty, which no dif¬ ference of place could alter, no length of time diminish? Edward. Might not his intercourse with other nations make the difference? Mr. B. Had he alone intercourse with them? Look at the philosophy of Philo, or compare the apostle with Josephus. It was neither Grecian philosophy nor Gre¬ cian patriotism that taught St. Paul; that made him very “ gladly spend and be spent, though the more he laboured, the less he was loved;” that made him account himself “ a debtor both to the Greeks and to the barbarians, to the wise and to the unwise.” The more you consider the 63 What do the epistles and speeches of Paul prove?—64 What re¬ specting St. Paul’s supposed conversion seems impossible to Mr. B.?—65 What questions does he ask, showing the improbability of any deception? —66 Edward asks if his intercourse with other nations might not havo made die difference—what i6 the answer?—67 How are we affected upon this subject by protracted consideration of St. Paul’s character? 1 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 171 character of St. Paul, the more convinced you must be¬ come of the truth of the miracles of the New Testament; for nothing else can account fbr it. The good Lord Lyt- tleton wrote an excellent little book on this subject, which you ought by all means to read. Edward. But might not the excellency of the Christ¬ ian religion produce those effects on St. Paul, independ¬ ently of miraculous agency? Might he not have been deceived, and his mind being strongly worked upon, make him thus zealous, in what he deemed a good cause ? Mr. B. St. Paul could not have been deceived. The miracle was wrought at a time when no prejudice of his mind favoured deception; in open day; in the open coun¬ try; it affected others as well as himself; and its effects on him were permanent, so that no doubt eould remain of the reality of “ the heavenly vision.” His blindness was miraculously inflicted, and miraculously removed. Maria. His own writings prove, also, that he was a man not easily imposed upon; and from his life, we can¬ not think he would impose upon others. Mr. B. We have yet one more test, and that decides the whole matter, proving he neither could have been deceived nor deceive. We have before seen that his epistles were genuine. Maria. Undoubtedly: the undesigned coincidence ob¬ servable in them, when compared with each other, and with the Acts of the Apostles, in addition to their univer¬ sal reception as his, fully establishes it. Edward. On that there can be no doubt. Mr. B. But in these epistles St. Paul asserts, that he himself worked miracles, and that he had communicated ex¬ traordinary powers to others also. Here no possibility of deception remains. It is not easy to say how far the senses may be imposed upon; but no human power what¬ soever can produce on another effects like these. No artifice of the other apostles could enable St. Paul to heal the cripple at Lystra—to recall Eutychus to life; no per- 68 Wliv might notTaul have been deceived”?—69 What does Mr. B. say of another test?—70 How does Maria, reply to him, touching the gen* uineness of Paul's epistles?—71 What is this other test!—72 How does Mr. B. speak of the importance of it? 172 CONVERSATIONS ON THE suasion on the part of St. Paul, or enthusiasm in them¬ selves, could induce the Corinthians to believe they had received from him the power of speaking languages they had never learned. Edward. And yet this must have been the case, since the Corinthians received it as genuine, and endured eve¬ ry suffering in consequence, rather than renounce Christ¬ ianity. Mr. B. The conclusions which Paley draws at the end of his Horse Paulime, are all that is necessary to state on this subject. 1. That Christianity was not a story set on foot, amidst the confusions which attended, and immediately preced¬ ed, the destruction of Jerusalem; when many extrava¬ gant reports were circulated; when men’s minds were broken by terror and distress; when, amidst the tumults that surrounded them, inquiry was impracticable. These letters show incontestibly, that the religion had fixed ajid established itself before this state of things took place. 2. Whereas it hath been insinuated, that our Gospels may have been made up of reports and stories which were current at the time, we may observe, that, with respect to the Epistles, this is impossible. 3. These letters prove, that the converts to Christiani¬ ty were not drawn from the barbarous, the mean, or the ignorant set of men, Avhich the representations of infidel¬ ity would sometimes make them. 4. St. Paul’s history, I mean so much of it as may be collected from his letters, is so implicated with that of the other apostles, and with the substance indeed of the Christian history itself, that I apprehend it will be found impossible to admit St. Paul’s story (I do not speak of the miraculous part of it) to be true, and y r et to reject the rest as fabulous. 5. St. Paul’s letters furnish evidence (and what better evidence than a man’s own letters can be desired?) of the soundness and sobriety of his judgment? 6. These letters are decisive, as to the sufferings of • . e 73 What are the two first conclusions of Paley on this subject'?—74 What are the third and fourth ones?—75 What are the fifth, sixth, and seventh conclusions drawn by him? EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 173 the author; also as to the distressed state of the Christ¬ ian church, and the dangers which attended the preach¬ ing of the Gospel. 7. St. Paul in these letters, asserts in positive and un¬ equivocal terms his performance of miracles, strictly and properly so called. CONVERSATION XII. Mr. B. The conversion of St. Paul, and his continu¬ ance in the faith of Christ till death, with the evidence collected from his letters, would alone be sufficient to establish the reality of the miracles of the New Testa¬ ment to any reasonable mind; but beyond this we may extend the proof, and from the Gospels themselves defend the truth of those parts of their contents which relate mi¬ raculous events. Maria. There is a peculiar interest attached to the miracles of our Lord. Mr. B. That the other apostles were neither deceivers nor deceived, is equally certain with the case of St. Paul. Out of twelve whom he selected, one indeed proved false, but instantly bore melancholy testimony to the truth, by putting an end to his life. The remaining eleven, with one elected in the place of the traitor, continued till death firm in the faith of their Master. Most of them sealed their testimony with their blood; and if any did not, the expectation of a cruel death was at least common to all. Maria. They could hardly have had this fortitude, but from the conviction that their labours were acceptable to God; which from their own doctrines they could not have, if they “ handled the word of God deceitfully.” Mr. B. They could not: nor is it by any means con¬ ceivable that they believed otherwise than they taught. 1 What does Mr. B. consider sufficient of itself to establish the reality of the miracles of the New Testament 1 ?—2 But from what other source may additional proof be drawn?—3 What is said of the sincerity of the twelve apostles?— 4 How does Maria look upon tltem y so far as sincerity is concerned? 15 * 174 CONVERSATIONS ON THE Edward. Can there be no supposition of a secret doc¬ trine only known to themselves ? Many sects have had two sets of opinions, one for themselves, and one for the public. Mr. B. That there is no trace of any secret doctrine distinct from that avowed, is certain; and if it had ever existed, we must have had some vestiges of it left. If such were held by the apostles, how could it be conceal¬ ed from Timothy, Titus, and their fellow-labourers? and if revealed to them, why not to their successors? and if so, when did this secret doctrine first cease to be trans¬ mitted ? If fraud were necessary at the commencement, was it less necessary hereafter? If it ever existed at all, is it credible that, among the numbers who were liable to martyrdom, none should reveal it—that, amidst the rage of conflicting parties among themselves, no hint of it should be found? Maria. There is certainly no trace of it in the Scrip¬ tures, which is of most importance. Mr. B. In St. Paul’s Epistles to Timothy and Titus, where we might have expected to meet with it, if any where, we only find the same language. Every thing is still directed to be done, as of a “ pure conscience, and faith unfeigned;” and the “ end of the commandment is charity” here as elsewhere. In St. Paul’s other Epistles, and in the Epistles of St. John, St. Peter, St. Jude, and St. James, the same integrity, the same purity of heart, are required: nor is there any passage which can be tor¬ tured into any thing like an insinuation of the reverse of “simplicity and godly sincerity.” Every portion of their writings exhibits them as men of the deepest piety—as men who would abhor the wickedness of recommending a course of life as of divine authority which they knew was nof so. Edward. But might not their real sentiments be alto¬ gether concealed? Prosperity and adversity exhibit the same characters under very different lights. 5 What Hoes Edward suppose, as to a secret doctrine 1 ?—6 In what way does Mr. B. refute such an ideal—7 Do the epistles to Timothy and Titus have any bearing upon this point?—8 What is said of the other epistles upon the same matter?—9 What question does Edward ask, re¬ specting their real sentiments? EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 175 Mr. B. But that we have their real sentiments we may rest assured, from the degree of intelligence which we perceive in them, and our knowledge of their situation in life. Their works prove to us, that they could not have entertained the chimerical thought of establishing the re¬ ligion they preached without Divine aid. They had, un¬ less the miracles of our Lord were real, no motive for attempting it; they were, unless supported by Divine power, manifestly unfit for it; they were by education, and the circumstances of birth, wholly indisposed to¬ wards it. Their Master had preached in Palestine, and been crucified in consequence. Were they so infatuated as to think they should escape, and that out of Judea, where their nation was hated, they should meet with a better reception? Edward. It does not appear probable, but men some¬ times run great risks for the chance of great gains. Mr. B. But what could they gain ? If any hope of gain did exist, it must have been founded on the chance of success, and without Divine aid they had no chance. They made all men their enemies, and that not indiffer¬ ent, but violent enemies. They attacked the vices and prejudices of men in such a manner, that no chance re¬ mained for their party, but by the obstinate perseverance of their converts; and unquestionably the apostles \yere the most likely to fall first. Hear St. Paul: “ For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men. We are fools for Christ’s sake, but ye are wise in Christ; we are weak, but ye are strong; ye are honourable, but wc are despis¬ ed. Even unto this present hour we both hunger and thirst, and are naked, and are buffeted, and have no cer¬ tain dwelling-place; and labour, working with our own hands: being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we suffer it; being defamed, we entreat: we are made as the 10 What is proved to ns by the works of the apostles in relation to this subject'?—11 How would they have been affected from an apprehension that the miracles recorded of our Lord were not real?—12 How were their worldly interests to be affected by preaching Christianity?—13 What is said by St. Paul himself in relation to the effect on these interests'? 176 CONVERSATIONS ON THE offscouring of all things unto this day.** 1 Cor. iv. 9— 13. Maria. But did they always expect suffering? Mr. B. Not before the resurrection of our Lord. We previously find them sanguine in their hopes of advance¬ ment, and calculating upon the future. Yet they tell us that from the beginning they were warned, that “ in the world they should have tribulation.” Afterwards we find they not only professed to expect this for themselves, but even inculcated the same upon their converts. “ We ought also to lay down our lives for the brethren,” says St. John. “ Beloved, think it not strange concerning the fiery trial which is to try you, as though some strange thing happened unto you: but rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ’s sufferings,” says St. Peter. “ My brethren, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations,” says St. James. Maria. Language like this could never have been used by impostors. It is contrary to common sense to suppose that any one would attempt to establish a reli¬ gion, when he inculcated such precepts, unless he was supported by the integrity of his intention, and the con¬ sciousness of the approval of his Maker. Mr. B. If it be supposed that the apostles were de¬ ceivers, they must be allowed to have had some of the qualifications of deceivers. But the whole of the New Testament is so found in opposition to all that was then most likely to succeed, that this opinion cannot be re¬ tained with the least regard to consistency. No de¬ ceiver would run in all things counter to prejudice, would neglect to lay hold on some failing, or to avail himself of some prevailing passion. No impostor could venture upon such an undertaking without securing some present aid, or holding out to his followers the expecta¬ tion of future support. 14 Did the apostles expect suffering from the beginning!—15 What were their views, subsequently to the resurrection, on the subject!—16 How does Maria look upon the expressions of the apostles on the subject quoted by IVJr. B.!—17 If the apostles were deceivers, what must we sup¬ pose of them!—18 How does it appear that this could not have been true of them! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 177 Ediuard. But the disciples had no such hope; for their preaching was “to the Jews a stumbling-block, and to the Greeks foolishness.” Mr. B. We are hardly sufficiently aware of the ab¬ surdity which then appeared in “ preaching Christ cru¬ cified.” We have got used to the idea; and it is only by the horror with which the Jews regard the notion of their Messiah thus suffering, that we can form any ade¬ quate idea of the hopelessness off attempting such a cause without the certain support of Divine aid. In the works of the Pagan antagonists of Christianity we have some traces of the manner in which the more polished nations of antiquity regarded it, as you have already seen. Edward. But might they not hope that their report of miracles would influence others as much as the actual performance of miracles would influence themselves? Mr. B. I do not think that they would have had any idea of the influence of miracles upon the mind, if they had not seen them. As to the world at large, they must have known that the report of miracles could have but little influence, for all sorts of tales of prodigies were current. The few real miracles that had been performed of old time had taught the priests of all the then exist¬ ing superstitions to pretend to wonders of some kind or other, till all were falling into contempt. Even the ac¬ tual evidence of miracles was not sufficient to overcome the prejudice some had to Christianity; and the then current answer to all pretensions of this kind, viz. the imputing them to magical arts, and the influence of evil spirits, must have been known to them as well as their enemies. If they found themselves supernaturally en¬ dowed with the power of working miracles, they had the evidence in themselves that God was with them, and they could have no doubt that their Lord and Master was risen from the dead; but without that power, they 19 What does Mr. B. say of preaching Christ crucified, on the suppo¬ sition that they did not expect divine aid!—20 What question does Ed¬ ward ask concerning the influence of miracles'!—21 But how are we to presume, that the idea of miracles would have operated upon the world at large'!—22 When seen, to what power were they usually ascribed! 178 CONVERSATIONS ON THE might after a time have donbted of the reality of what they had seen with their own eyes, and have returned to their former occupations: and without that knowledge of the reality, it seems inconceivable to suppose they would have persisted in a course in which their Master had perished. Had they been deceivers, they must have been conscious that a religion such as Christianity would inevitably bring upon its votaries persecution, as upon its Founder. If they had wished to render it subservi¬ ent to their interest, they would have altered it to suit the popular taste; but by persisting in it, despite of warnings and example, they prove beyond all doubt their sincerity; they establish beyond all question the reality of their belief in the miracles of Jesus of Nazareth. Ma ria. There does not appear any other way of ac¬ counting for their conduct upon rational principles, than that they were what they profess to be, sincere and up¬ right servants of God, fully convinced that Jesus of Nazareth was sent from Him, and that the miracles he had wrought were a sufficient attestation of a divine mission. Edward. Nor does it seem possible to account them deceivers, since their conduct proves they neglected every art which deceivers would have cultivated, and threw the reality of their pretensions upon a proof which was least likely to win over converts. Mr. B. But if the apostles were not deceivers, we can ourselves determine that they were not deceived ; for the narratives which are given us are such, that no place for deception remains. The miracles performed by our Lord were too numerous, and too evident, to leave any doubt upon the mind; they left none upon the minds of those who witnessed them, whether friends or foes. Maria. But from the belief that miracles might be performed without the intervention of the Supreme Be- 23 What was necessary in order to have induced the apostles to persist in a course which had been ruinous to their Master!—24 II they had been deceivers, and wished to render religion subservient to their interests, what would have been true of them!—25 On what principle alone does Maria conclude that their conduct can be accounted for!—26 Why does Edward think they could not have been deceivers!—27 If they were not deceivers, why does Mr. B. suppose they could not have been deceived! EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. m ing, is it not probable that these miracles were less carefully examined into than they ought to have been? Mr. B. Some of them appear to have been very strictly inquired into, as in the case of the man born blind, whose eyes were opened, as related by St, John, when the Pharisees examined both the man and his pa¬ rents. No doubt appears to have been entertained by the council which assembled to consult upon the raising of Lazarus. The reasoning employed upon that occa¬ sion is very singular, and strikingly exemplifies the be¬ lief and expectations of the Jews at that time. “ Then gathered the chief priests and the Pharisees a council, and said, What do we? for this man doeth many miracles. If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him; and the Romans shall come, and take away both our place and nation .”—John xi. 47, 48. In what manner the Jews brought themselves to act against the evidence of miracles we cannot at this distance of time clearly determine, nor is it of any great importance, considering the wretched state into which that nation had fallen. We want not their reasonings upon the fact: all that is necessary for us is the fact itself; and there certainly is no fact more universally attested than this,—that the Founder of Christianity did work miracles. It is alto¬ gether out of the power of any one to disprove it by testimony; and it can therefore only be overthrown by internal evidence against it, or by its leading to absurd and impossible conclusions in confirming the truth of the Christian religion. Maria. Contradictions in the accounts of the miracles would overthrow the whole. Mr. B. But no such contradictions are to be found. You must remember a most material distinction is to be drawn between varying and contradictory accounts of the same fact. Three persons giving an account of the 28 On what account does Maria think the miracles might have been less carefully examined than they should have been?—29 How does Mr. B. reply to her?—30 What is an instance of .their reasoning upon the sub¬ ject, as quoted from St. John’s gospel?—31 What is said in relation to the fact, tiiat the Jews were accustomed to act against the evidence of mir¬ acles?—32 Are there any contradictions in the accounts of the miracles'? 180 CONVERSATIONS ON THE same fact will each relate what fell immediately before his own eyes, and affected his own mind most forcibly. It would require a second miracle to make all the wit¬ nesses of a miracle agree in their accounts of it, to that degree which some would require; for it certainly would be a violation of the usual course of things that the same event should strike different persons,, differently situated in all points, alike, and that independent witnesses should give precisely the same account. Edward. If witnesses thus agreed, it would have very much the appearance of design. Maria. Is there not too much agreement, instead of too little, in the statements of the three first evangelists ? May we not thence infer they copied from each other? Mr. B. There are insuperable objections to the hy¬ pothesis of their having copied from each other; and the accounting both for the matter and for the words which they have in common is attended with considerable diffi¬ culties. You will find in the notes to Michaelis an in¬ genious hypothesis by the learned translator, which has excited a good deal of controversy upon the subject, and has not yet led to any decision. There can be little doubt that the translator of St. Matthew has availed him¬ self of the Gospels of St. Mark and St. Luke, where they had matter in common with the first, which accounts in some measure for the verbal agreement; but we know too little respecting the origin of the Gospels, for any great advances to be made towards the elucidation of the subject. Edward. What matter they have in common, if unac¬ companied by contradictory circumstances, must mate¬ rially strengthen tkie credibility of the whole. Mr. B. It does so: for hitherto no circumstances have been adduced of such a nature as to shake our belief. 33 What distinction in terms is here suggested as of importace!—34 How is this illustrated!—35 AVhat questions does Maria ask respecting the statements of the three first evangelists!—36 What does Mr. B. say of this hypothesis, and what allusiorr, on the subject, does he make to Mi¬ chaelis!— 37 What admission is made in relation to St. Matthew!—38 How is the credibility of these books affected by the matters in cornmon. which they contain! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 181 You will bear in mind also, that all which has been said before, as to the genuineness of these books, also con¬ firms their credibility; for upon the truth of these narra¬ tions of miracles numbers hazarded their lives and all that was dear to them. The miracles of our Lord were expressly wrought to sanction his doctrine: upon the truth of that doctrine all the hopes of the first Chris¬ tians depended; for the sake of that doctrine they ran the greatest risks, and underwent the greatest hardships; they would not therefore believe those miracles without the best authority. Maria. But many persons have often been led away by false miracles: many Roman Catholics believe, in miracles which Protestants despise. Mr. B. That there have been many false miracles is undeniable, and that, numbers have been deceived by them is equally true; but that does not in the least in¬ validate the fact of any well-authenticated miracle hav¬ ing been wrought. Maria. But how shall a distinction be drawn between the true and the false? Mr. B. Leslie, in his Short and Easy Method with the Deists, has given the following rules :— “1. That the matter of fact be such, as that men’s outward senses, their eyes and ears, may be judges of it. “ 2. That it be done publicly in the face of the world. “ 3. That not only public monuments be kept up in memory of it, but some outward actions to be performed. “ 4. That such monuments and such actions or ob¬ servances be instituted, and do commence from the time that the matter of fact was done.”— Leslie's Works, vol. i. p. 11. Of these the two first exclude the possibility of impo¬ sition at the time, and the two last subsequently. Edward. Are there examples given of the application of these rules? 39 For what purpose were the miracles of our Lord wrought 1 ?—40 What does Mr. B. say of (lie pretended miracles that have been named?— ' 41 Who has given rules for distinguishing between true and false tuira- clegi_42 What are these rules?—43 What is said of them? 16 CONVERSATIONS ON THE 182 Mr. B. Leslie applies'them, 1st, to Moses; 2dly, to Christ; and, 3dly, to Mahomet; and concludes on tho whole, that no fabulous action has all these marks; that there is greater certainty for Christianity than for other received facts; and that the importance of the subject makes deception more difficult. Maria. And have no miracles been ascertained as an¬ swering the conditions required in these rules except those of the Bible? Mr. B. None, as far as my knowledge extends; and I believe the rules are pretty generally admitted as con¬ clusive. Maria. In what manner can the force of the eviden¬ ce? for the miracles of the New Testament be evaded, admitting its genuineness ? Mr. B. The most singular perhaps is one which was attempted about an hundred years ago—in maintaining that they were to be understood allegorically, and not literally. Maria. What could possibly give rise to so strange an idea ? Mr. B. Possibly a similar attempt made a short time before, in which the force of the argument from prophecy was attacked in the same way. It is hardly necessary to add, that both were wholly unavailing. Maria. Was then the attempt to overthrow the mira¬ cles given up? Mr. B. The great miracle of all, the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, was more particularly attacked, which produced many excellent defences of it, particu¬ larly Sherlock’s “ Trial of the Witnesses,” in which the evidence for this particular miracle is placed in a very striking light. Edward. But are there not serious difficulties, if not contradictions, in the account of the resurrection? 44 What application of these rules is given!—45 Have any miracles been ascertained, except those in the Bible, answering the conditions re¬ quired in these rules!—46 After having admitted the genuineness of the miracles in the New Testament, what method has been attempted to evade their force!—47 What could have given rise to so strange an idea!—48 Maria asks, if the attempt to overtkrow4.be miracles waa .given up—what is the answer to this question! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 183 Mr. B. I think the work just mentioned ■will satisfy you; but you may also read Mr. West’s book on the same subject, in which he has harmonised the accounts of the evangelists very satisfactorily. Maria. All the evangelists bear witness to that fact. Mr. B. Not only so; but “It is completely certain that the apostles of Christ and the first teachers of Chris • tianity asserted the fact; and this would have been cer tain if the four Gospels had been lost or never written Every piece of Scripture recognises the resurrection, every epistle of every apostle, every author contempo¬ rary with the apostles, of the age immediately succeed¬ ing the apostles, every writing from that age to the present, genuine or spurious, on the side of Christianity or against it, concur in representing the resurrection of Christ as an article of his history received without doubt or disagreement by all who called themselves Chris¬ tians, as alleged from the beginning by the propagators of the institution, and alleged as the centre of their tes¬ timony.”— Palcy, vol. ii. p. 97. Edivard. On these accounts it is no wonder that the Jews, who acknowledge the other miracles of our Lord, should deny this; and it may well be the great object of infidels to overthrow it. Mr. B. The fact seems, however, beyond the reach of human power to disturb. The New Testament state¬ ment of the resurrection accounts satisfactorily for that which without it is unaccountable. The Jewish account of the body being stolen whilst the guards stationed to watch at the sepulchre were asleep is palpably absurd: the body never could be produced or traced, nor has any tolerable account yet been drawn up more probable. If the resurrection had not taken place, there was no rea¬ son why the disciples should propagate this new faith; they were Jews, and must have looked for another; they were poor and unlearned men, wholly unequal to con- 49 What is said of Mr. West’s book on the resurrection!—50 What does Palev say upon the same subject!—51 What distinction do the Jews make between the resurrection of our Lord and the other miracles'?—52 What is said of the Jewish account of the resurrection!—53 If the resur¬ rection had not taken place, what assertion is made respecting the disciples! CONVERSATIONS ON THE 184 tending with the power of the state, and must have been more disposed to let the matter be forgotten than to ex¬ pose themselves for one who had disappointed their ex¬ pectations. On this great fact every one can judge: all parties agree that the Founder of this religion was put to death; all agree that his first followers were taken from very low stations; all agree that, from the time assigned for his resurrection, the exertions of his followers were great and successful, beyond any thing in the history of mankind. It is also certain that from them we have re¬ ceived the only system of professedly revealed religion capable of universal dissemination, and adapted for every age, which has yet been produced; that this alone con¬ tains a perfect morality, and motives sufficiently powerful to affect all ranks and stations in life. We also know, that to transmit this to us they endured the heaviest af¬ flictions, and closed lives of the most arduous exertion by painful and ignominious deaths; and to the last per¬ sisted in giving the same account, and made the fact of the resurrection of their Lord their great ground of con¬ solation, as they had ever made it the great motive for action. Now, under all these circumstances, who will venture to reject their testimony? who will be so affect¬ edly incredulous as to doubt the truth of that thus sol¬ emnly assured to him, and yet be so grossly credulous as to believe that a dozen fishermen and the like, in a de¬ spised corner of a despised province of the Roman em¬ pire, totally destitute of all outward help, could project and execute such a project as the overthrow of the various religions which were held throughout its territory, though interwoven with the state, with domestic life, and with the recollections of past glory? Maria. It cannot be: their statement must be true. Mr. B. But if any Jew, or set of Jews, had intellect to project such an undertaking, would they not also have something like common sense in conducting it? Would they attempt the most arduous of all schemes by the very 54 In what do all parties agree!—55 What else do we know respecting them!—56 In view of these facts, what questions are propounded!—57 What ones are respecting the Jews, as having an agency in the proposed delusion! EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 185 means likely to ruin it? Wherever was there a false religion founded upon such a basis, or promulgated by such means? But by what calculation of chances are we to account for these men purging their minds from the prejudices of their nation, and rising far above all that have preceded or followed them;—striking at every species of vice with so bold and yet so unerring an aim; turning the human heart inside out, as though they had all their lives been absorbed in the study of it; express¬ ing the most important truths in the most unpolished lan¬ guage; teaching by example as well as precept; and, to crown all, composing a character, the elements of which, were to all others unknown; developing its excellencies in the most varied and difficult situations, and yet pre¬ serving to it such an appearance of nature, that the mind is constrained to own its reality as well as perfection? Edward. And yet these men have left no other trace behind them but this religion. If this had been merely human, surely some further information would have de¬ scended to us. Mr. B. But why should such men make such an at¬ tempt? Why, as Jews, should they seek to overthrow the fondest hopes of their country ? Why, as men, should they act so contrary to the conduct of all others, as to* inculcate the fear of God, by means which they knew hateful to him ? What could be their motive.—what their ultimate object? They did not unite for secular advan¬ tage to themselves, nor for their children, nor for their friends, nor for their country. Maria. It is unnecessary saying more; for nothing but contradiction in the religion itself can overthrow the force of the facts, that the New Testament was delivered to us by such men, and under such circumstances. Mr. B. Nothing else can; and this you must therefore bear in mind. We have proceeded step by step, till we 58 How can we account for the fact, that these men rose so much in character above what might have been expected of them,, on the supposi¬ tion that Christianity is not true 1 ?—60 Might they not have been governed by some secular motives'?—61 Why does Maria say it is unnecessary to proceed further in the argument'?—62 To what conclusion has Mr. B. ar¬ rived? 16* 186 CONVERSATIONS ON THE have arrived at the conclusion that miracles were wrought, which prove Christianity to be true; for it cannot be ne¬ cessary to argue in these days against magic; nor can it need any long consideration to show that the power of suspending the laws of nature is in the hands of Him alone who ordained those laws. If we may not conclude that the miracles of the New Testament were really wrought, all reliance upon any testimony, however strong, must be at an end, and no settled principles of action between man and man can subsist: if we may not conclude from those miracles, that the religion in question is of divine origin, all confidence towards God also must cease; and practi¬ cal if not theoretical atheism must be the result. Edivard. Do you then think it necessary to pursue the subject further? Mr. B. The accumulative force of the evidences of Christianity is not yet seen; but the first great point is gained, viz. that if Christianity cannot be proved to be false, it must be admitted as true; by which I mean that the evidence already adduced is of that nature, that noth¬ ing short of the observance of the religion involving an impossibility can overthrow it, without overthrowing all the common principles by which the moral world is kept together. Maria. We must see, then, what the religion involves, and inquire how far it can be observed. Mr. B. The religion of the New Testament involves several very important considerations, and in its details perhaps the sceptic may expect to find that weakness which could not be detected in its evidences. But if in these branches also we find additional probability that it is from God, no excuse will remain for him, who upon less chances would deem it the height of folly to pursue a different line of conduct to what prudence dictated. 63 What is the consequence, if we may not conclude that the miracles of the New Testament were really wroughtT—64 And what will be the consequence, if we may not conclude from those miracles, that Christian¬ ity is of divine originT—65 Edward asks, if it is necessary to pursue the argument further—what is the reply of Mr. B.T—66 What remark does he make of the sceptic, in relation to the argumentT EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 187 Maria. How will you then consider the remaining por¬ tions of this subject? Mr. B. If the New Testament be inspired, as is gene¬ rally believed, any fault inconsistent with that inspiration overthrows its claims. If the religion therein inculcated profess to be of universal obligation, when from the na¬ ture of things this cannot be the case, it also falls to the ground. If it be founded upon the Old Testament, and be connected with it, as forming one system of religion, any objection which will overthrow the foundation will destroy the superstructure also. Edward. These points, then, we have to consider; viz. the inspiration of the New Testament, the doctrines and precepts of the religion, and its connexion with a previous dispensation in the Old Testament. Mr. B. And this we shall do in a reverse order to that mentioned; that first we may understand the true nature of this religion, as to its general place in the dispensa¬ tions of God towards mankind; then that the extent of its influence upon the mind may properly be manifest; and, lastly, that we may be fully aware how far the Holy Scriptures afford us an unerring rule, by which to regu¬ late our opinions and our conduct. Edward. In the course of this, also, we must consider how far objections lie against Christianity, as arising from historical difficulties, philosophical truth, or as connected with morals. In all this it will be necessary to be careful that we do not assign more to the Holy Scriptures than what properly belongs to them, lest we make them fail through weak additions attached to them; and, at the same time, that we do not attribute more to our knowl¬ edge, derived from other sources, than it really is enti¬ tled to. Mr. B. We must, however, at the same time, not fear to expose Christianity, as thus revealed, to the strictest scrutiny; for the simple and entire truth is our great ob- 67 What question does Maria here ask!—68 How does Mr. B. answer it!—69 What paints does Edward say we have to consider!—70 In what order does Mr. B. propose to consider them!—71 How does Edward say we must proceed in doing this!—72 With what remarks does Mr. B. con¬ clude the conversation! 188 CONVERSATIONS ON THE ject; and if, through partiality for either side, we evade the real question, we both expose ourselves to deception, and, even if by chance we are right in our determination, we lose all just grounds of confidence. CONVERSATION XIII. Mr. B. Christianity professes not only to be a divine revelation, it claims also to be founded on previous reve¬ lations made from the earliest time to the ancestors of the Jews; to Moses, their great lawgiver, and to various prophets in succession, till about 400 years before the Christian era. Edward. If these claims be well founded, the objection brought by sceptics, as being partial with respect to time, is made void. Mr. B. We thus make a very important advance to¬ wards establishing the certainty of the Christian revela¬ tion itself; for the books to which appeal is made have been in the care and keeping of the bitterest enemies of Christianity; so that if they bear witness to it, we not only enlarge the foundation on which Christianity is placed, but also bind the whole together, each part strengthening the other. Edward. But have not doubts been entertained with regard to the Old Testament, by those who have been fully persuaded of the divine origin of Christianity ? Mr, B. So it would appear, if we may give credit to the statements of some writers; but how it is possible to sever the two appears to me inconceivable. Addressing the Jews, our Lord says, “ Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life; and they are they which testify of me ,”—John v. 39. 1 What does Christianity profess to bet—2 If these claims are well founded, what does Edward say will be the consequence 1—S How does Mr. B. say that v/o make a very important advance towards establishing- the certainty of the Christian revelation'*—4 What question does Edward ask respecting tho Old Testamout!— 5 How does Mr. £. reply to it*. EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 189 In an interview with two of his disciples after his res¬ urrection, we are told, “ Beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself .”—Luke xxiv. 27. And shortly after, when in the presence of the apos¬ tles, “ He said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures, and said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day,” &c .—Luke xxiv. 44. Maria. This is decisive as to the alleged connexion between the Old and New Testaments. Mr. B. And of the great importance of this connexion we are fully assured by the references of our Lord to it, and by the conduct of the apostles. The New Testament is full of this subject; and from the earliest times it was the custom, as in the case of Apollos, to prove from the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ. Maria. But what Scriptures were these which were thus read? How shall we be assured that we have the same ? Mr. B. This demands an inquiry of a similar nature to that formerly requisite for the New Testament. We must first inquire as to what are the canonical books, and, sec¬ ondly, as to their integrity. With regard to the former, our labour is greatly shortened by now having the su¬ preme authority of our Lord to appeal to. What he ac¬ knowledged as of divine authority, must be so; and the only difficulty is to ascertain how far his approval ex¬ tended. Edward. But the books of the Old Testament may also be established independently of the New Testament, as to their genuineness, integrity, and credibility. Mr. B. They may; and it is on such grounds that they 6 What passages are quoted to show the connection between the Old Testament and the Newt—7 How are we assured of the importance of this connexion"!—8 What questions does Maria ask respecting the iden¬ tity of the Old Testament scriptures'!—9 How does Mr. B. answer them! 190 CONVERSATIONS ON THE are held by the Jews. Many defences of Christianity begin with proving the authority of the Old Testament, and afterwards, by comparing the New Testament with it, establish the truth of the latter; but in arguing in fa¬ vour of Christianity, as a divine revelation, against those who acknowledge no divine revelation, we must of course take that method which is most strictly demonstrative,— and such appears to me that adopted by Bishop Marsh, in his Lectures,—of first proving the Divine authority of the New Testament, which is certainly of easier proof, and thence inferring the authority of the Old Testament, as coiinected with it. Edward. This method does not, however, at all impugn the proof independent of Christianity. Mr. B. By no means; if by that is meant only such a proof as establishes the religion of Moses up to the com¬ ing of our Lord: beyond that, the evidence for the Old Testament would not only fail, but positive proof would lie against it, if Christianity be not admitted as its com¬ pletion. Maria. So that in either case we come to the same con¬ clusions. The New Testament is requisite for the fulfil¬ ment of the Old, and the latter is an equally necessary preliminary to the former. If either can be proved false, as in.volved with each other, both will fall to the ground: if neither can be proved false, the proof in favour of each becomes doubly strong. Edward. Much more than doubly strong; for the whole probability does not proceed by addition of the chances in each case, but by the multiplication of them, provided that the proofs of the divine origin of each (as unconnect¬ ed with each other) are independent of each other. Mr. B. The first thing to be ascertained is, what books were held by our Lord as of divine authority ? Maria. In two of the passages you before quoted, he 10 Mav the books of the Old Testament be established, independent of the New Testament?—11 In arguing in favour of Christianity, as a divine revelation, against those who acknowledge no divine revelation—what method must we take?—12 What author has adopted this method?—13 Does this method impugn the proof, independent of Christianity?—14 IIovv does Maria suppose that the Old and New Testament stand related to each other, as to their truth?—15 What is the first thing to be ascertained? EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY, 191 only speaks of the Scriptures generally; and in the third, of the Law, the Prophets, and the psalms. Mr. B. It is then necessary to determine what was meant by these expressions in our Lord’s time. But these expressions are precisely those made use of to de¬ note the Hfebrew Bible as now received. To the five first books they have long given the title of the Law, or the Law of Moses; to the historical and prophetical books, they gave the name of the Prophets, as having been writ¬ ten by them; and to the remaining books, viz. the writ¬ ings of David and Solomon, the book of Job, the book of Lamentations, and the books of Ruth, Chronicles, Esther, Daniel, Nehemiah, and Ezra, they gave the title of Che- tubim, which appears to correspond to the Psalms of the New Testament. Edward. How long is this division known to have existed among the Jews? Mr. B. Certainly for the last 1400 years, and probably long before the coming of our Lord, as in the prologue to the Wisdom of Jesus, the son of Sirach, we have this three¬ fold division twice mentioned; first as the Law, the Proph¬ ets, and other books of our fathers; and, secondly, as the Law, the Prophets, and the rest of the books. Maria. It seems reasonable, then, to conclude that the last-named books had not originally a fixed title, and therefore might be included by our Lord under the gen¬ eral expression of the Psalms. Mr. B. But we have yet further evidence; for Philo and Josephus, who lived near the time of our Lord, like¬ wise divide the Hebrew Scriptures in the same manner, giving to the two first classes the determinate titles of the Law and the Prophets, but only describing the rest— Philo as containing Hymns, ( i. e. Psalms) and other books by which knowledge and piety are promoted and described; Josephus as containing Hymns (or Psalms) to God, and instructions of life for man. 16 What objection is made, by Maria, to the application of the pass¬ ages quoted from our Lord, to the argument!—17 What is the reply to this objection by Mr. B.!—18 How long is this division known to have existed among the Jews!—19 To Maria, what appears reasonable in rela¬ tion to tibia subject!—20 What further evidence have we in relation to it! 192 CONVERSATIONS ON THE Edward. So that, in fact, all the divisions seem to agree as to substance: do they agree in detail? Mr. B. According to Josephus, there were five books in the first class, thirteen in the second, and four in the third; in all twenty-two. In the time of Jerome, the whole number of books also amounted to twenty-two; but in our Bible there are thirty-nine. Maria. Does not this overthrow the argument? Mr. B. No; for it merely arises from different classi¬ fications, as we are informed by Jerome: for in his time the book of Ruth was appended to that of Judges, and that of Lamentations to Jeremiah; the two books of Sam¬ uel were united in one; similarly, the two books of Chron¬ icles in one, the books of Ezra and Nehemiah in one; and the twelve minor prophets also united into one; so that the thirty-nine books of our time constituted, in fact, the twenty-two of Jerome and Josephus. Edward. Are there any other catalogues, besides that of Jerome? Mr. B. In the third century we have one by Origen, and in the second, one by Melito; we have also one in the Talmud. Maria. But are the books of our Lord’s time clearly identified with those of ours? Mr. B. Josephus determines the books of the law and the Psalms, and has quoted all the books except those of Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Solomon’s Song. Philo has quoted all except those of Ruth, Chronicles, Nehemiah, Daniel, Lamentations, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and Canticles. In the New Testament, all are quoted except Judges, Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and Canticles. Edward. But the non-existence of quotations does not establish the non-existence or want of authority in the books; for it is very probable, from their subjects, that no 21 According to Josephus, how many books were there in the different classes'!—22 Why does not this overthrow the argument'!—23 Are there any other catalogues besides that of Jerome'?—24 What books of the Old Testament, are established by Josephus?—25 What ones are quoted by Philo?—26 What ones are quoted in the New Testament? evidences of christiaxitf. 193 quotations could be required from the nature of the works in which the rest were quoted. Mr. B. That our Lord had the same division of the Scriptures in view which Josephus had, cannot be doubt¬ ed; that the books which Josephus had were the same a 3 those of Jerome, is proved in a very satisfactory manner by Bishop Marsh; and that our books are the same as those of Jerome is certain. We may therefore conclude, that the books referred to by our Lord as having author¬ ity, were neither more nor less than those which we now receive as canonical. This being also generally acknowl¬ edged, further proof seems unnecessary. Edward. But if the books are the same, how can we determine the integrity of these books? Mr. B. The peculiar circumstances under which the Old Testament has been transmitted, is sufficient securi¬ ty on this point. By the very nature of the books of Moses, as being the law of the land, as well as by the express commandment given at the time of their promul¬ gation, the uncorrupted preservation of the first of the three great divisions of the Old Testament was secured. “And Moses commanded them, saying, At the end of every seven years, in the solemnity of the year of re¬ lease, in the feast of tabernacles, when all Israel is come to appear before the Lord thy God in the place which he shall choose, thou shalt read this law before all Israel, in their hearing.”—Deut. xxxi. 10, 11. Maria. And was this command observed? Mr. B. We have every reason to believe it was: in va¬ rious parts of the sacred writings we find mention made of the law as being the supreme authority; and from the time of Joshua to Nehemiah we find it appealed to in this manner. Edward. But was not the law altogether lost for a time ? Mr. B. The particular copy of the law deposited in 27 What division of these books is it supposed our Lord had in view'? —28 How is it shown that we have the same division?—29 But if the books are the same, how can we determine the integrity of these books? —30 What commandment was given Israel by Moses respecting the law? —31 Was this law observed? 17 194 CONVERSATIONS ON THE the Temple was found by Hilkiah, in the reign of Josiah, and therefere must have been secreted or lost during the idolatrous reigns of Manasseh and Amon; but at no oth¬ er period are we aware of even this single copy having been missing; and its loss could not have affected the other copies which must have existed elsewhere, from the fact of its being the law of the land. Edward. Has it not been asserted, however, that it was wholly lost at the destruction of Jerusalem? Mr. B. It has, by those whose wishes outstripped their knowledge; for there is not the least pretext for the as¬ sertion beyond a passage in a notorious forgery, of which even the original text is now lost. But such assailants are in general willing to admit any thing as genuine, in order to prove the Scriptures not genuine, or any thing credible, to show these books are not credible. From the writings of Ezra and Nehemiah, we however are as¬ sured that the law was not lost, and we also know that before then Daniel had it in Babylon. Maria. And have the other Scriptures been preserved in like manner? Mr. B. We have reason to believe so, since we find the books of Joshua and Samuel placed with the law; and it seems natural to conclude, that the rest would be added in order. Maria. But by whom were all collected and arranged as we have them now? Mr. B. That was the work of Ezra, emphatically call¬ ed “the scribe,” and the president of a celebrated assem¬ bly, called “the Great Synagogue,” when the canon of the Old Testament was for ever fixed in the state in which we now have it. Edward. But some have supposed that he wrote it all in fact, and that the accounts given to us were drawn up merely to give authority to his work. 82 But was not the law altogether lost for a time?—33 Has it not been asserted that the law was wholly lost at the destruction of Jerusalem'*—34 Of what are we assured in relation to it by Ezra and Nehemiah?—35 Have the other scriptures been preserved in like manner?—36 By whom -were they all collected and arranged as we now have them?—37 What .does Edward say some have supposed concerning Ezra? EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 195 Mr. B. This is another of those incredible hypotheses which are never wanting when the object is to invalidate the sacred volume. Neither Ezra nor any other man (unless by inspiration, which no Deist can suppose,) could write the various books in question, even if when written it had been possible to persuade the people of their genuineness. There is internal as well as external evidence for these books, which cannot be set aside by hypothesis. Exclusively of our Lord’s attestation to the authority of the Old Testament, its genuineness and credibility may from itself be shown to be such as no la¬ bour now can overthrow, and still less the cavils of men ignorant of the language of the books they condemn. The positive external evidence in behalf of the Old Tes¬ tament is in a great measure placed beyond our reach, for we have no contemporary authors to bear testimony to it; but that must not be imputed as a defect to these writings, which is only the defect of the age in which they were produced. Every other species of evidence however we have, in a stronger degree than can be brought forward for writings, the authenticity of which no one would dispute. In the Old Testament we per¬ ceive a gradation in the language, such as may be natu¬ rally accounted for, on the supposition of these books be¬ ing produced in a long course of ages, but on no other; we perceive a difference in the style of the various au¬ thors, such as it is wholly incredible that any forger could produce. It is a very easy thing to make the supposition of forgery; but it would be found no easy task to imitate the writings of any one, either Moses, David, Solomon, Isaiah, Jeremiah, or Ezekiel; and as to Ezra producing all these, and many more, it is mere mockery to enter¬ tain the idea for a moment. Edward. But we may not assume the integrity of the Old Testament to prove its genuineness. Mr. B. We may not, and all that has hitherto been 38 Could he, or any one else, have written these various books'?—39 What is said of the want of positive external evidence in favour of the Old Testament'?—40 What is said of the gradation of language in those books?—41 What is said of the supposition that certain of these books are forgeries? 196 CONVERSATIONS ON THE said need only be regarded as illustrative of the care ' which the Jews took of their sacred writings. We know from external evidence the existence of these writings up to the time of Ezra. From the writers of the New Tes¬ tament, Josephus, and indeed every Jewish author, we know the scrupulous regard they have ever paid to the uncorrupted preservation of these books: the books them¬ selves, as now existing, are a sufficient proof of their hon¬ esty; for they contain passages which are destructive of Judaism itself in its present state, and from which the people whom they most have hated, draw their strongest arguments. We are secured by numerous manuscripts, by quotations, by versions, by commentaries, and by the disputes of contending parties, from imposition up to the time of our Lord; and even beyond his time, by the Greek version, known by the name of the Septuagint. Maria. But our Lord’s authority alone will be suffici¬ ent to the Christian. He accused the Jews of many things, but not of having corrupted the word of God. Mr. B. And even to others, also, the testimony of our Lord and his apostles to the Scriptures of the Old Tes¬ tament are important, as being that of those who were especially opposed to the prevailing follies and vices of that nation. If the miracles of our Lord had not been real^ his testimony would still have been important, though not conclusive, on the subject; and all the diffi¬ culties connected with the rejection of the Old Testament press alike upon the Christian and the Deist. The Christ¬ ian is bound by the fact of the integrity of the Old Tes¬ tament, to defend it as far as it was connected with his religion by the founder of that religion. The infidel is bound by the same fact to account for the difficulties into which it brings him. The first is bound to believe these records genuine and authentic, on the authority of his Lord and Master: the second is bound to disprove the 42 What do we know of these writings, from different early authors'?— 43 How are we secured against any deception in regard to their genuine¬ ness 1 ?—44 What does Maria say of our Lord’s authority upon the subject'? —45 What does Mr. B. say of his authority 1 ?—46 How is the Christian bound to defend it!—47 What is the infidel bound to do?—48 And what is it then said each one is bound to do? EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 197 evidence of their being genuine and authentic, both as attested by the divine mission of Christ, and by the evi¬ dence which is more exclusively their own, and which equally existed before the appearance of Christ. To those who deem the evidence already adduced in behalf of the miracles of our Lord conclusive, no further proof is indeed requisite; but as some may not, I will now show you how the argument may be conducted inde¬ pendently of this; and thereby through the means of these writings additional evidence be brought to prove the miracles of our Lord real. Edivard. The Christian is not, however, bound to do this, since thq evidence in favour of the miracles of our Lord ought to be sufficient. Mr. B. He is not, nor do I consider, even in the course now to be pursued, myself bound to prove every thing which a Jew might justly urge in behalf of the Old Tes¬ tament. All that it appears to me necessary to show is, that the books which involve most closely the truth of the Mosaic revelation, and that of our Lord, are certainly genuine, and that the rest cannot be proved spurious, and that both are credible. But if in any respects length of time may have weakened the proof, you must still bear in mind that the proof is rather t-hat which might have been required to be produced previously to the coming of Christ, when its weight must have been greater. Maria. But is it not necessary to this, that we be as¬ sured that we have the sacred text as near as possible to that published by Ezra? Mr. B. It is, and for that purpose the most careful in¬ vestigations have been made at great expense, and the most laborious examination of manuscripts has taken place. Edivard. The Jews, also, have taken great pains, I believe, to ascertain the true text. Mr. B. They have long ago, and their superstitious 49 For whose benefit does Mr. B. propose to adduce other evidence on the subject 1 ?—50 With this view, what does he propose to do?—51 If the C roof to be offered is apparently weakened by length of time, what is to e considered?—52 What does Mr. B. say of the assurance we possess, that the sacred text,, now in existence, is the same as that published by Ezra? 17 * CONVERSATIONS ON THE 1$S reverence of it has been of the greatest use in this re¬ spect. They have numbered the sentences, words, and letters, in such a variety of ways, and have so noted down every minute circumstance connected with it, that we are certain, that no very material omission or addition has been made. In the very copying of it they are also so scrupulous, that we are enabled to rely on them to a great degree. The Septuagint, from its having been made not long after the time of Ezra, is also of great importance, and has in like manner been critically re¬ vised. In short, no means of ascertaining the truth have been left untried, and from the labours of Kennicott in England, and De Rossi in Italy, we are enabled to rely upon a Hebrew text sufficiently accurate for all the pur¬ poses of an inquiry into its genuineness and credibility; as similarly from the labours of the Masorites, we ascer¬ tain the opinion of the Jews on the sacred text, and from those of Holmes we can argue from the testimony of a critically correct copy of the Septuagint. Edward. We then argue from the text thus ascertain¬ ed, believing it to be sufficiently near that of Ezra for the purposes of inquiry; and to that we are limited, hav¬ ing no external testimony to it beyond that period. Mr. B. These books, then, profess to be by various authors, the names of some being well known in the East, whilst with others we are only acquainted through the medium of this volume. Now that Moses and Solomon, the son of David, lived and wrote is certain, from the concurrent testimony of all the nations near Palestine; that the people of Israel were led out of Egypt by the former, and that the latter raised that nation to their greatest height of prosperity, cannot be disputed on any reasonable grounds. The question is, are the writings ascribed to Moses and Solomon theirs or not? That it is highly probable they are, appears from the following considerations: 53 What is said of the care with which the Jews have preserved it 1 ?— 54 What is said of the value of the Septuagint 1 ?—55 What authors are named as having rendered valuable services in this investigation?—56 What is said to be known of Moses and Solomon?—57 What is here the important question respecting them? EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 199 The language, style, and tenour of them, are such as might have been expected. The most minute examination cannot prove any thing inconsistent with such a supposition. The nature of these writings is such as excludes, in a great measure, the possibility of imposition. The obedience of a nation to them, and the tacit con¬ currence of neighbouring nations in the fact, give us all the external proof that the nature of the case will admit. And every other hypothesis is attended with insupera¬ ble difficulties. Edivard. The testimony of the learned, with regard to the language and style, must be allowed, since no con¬ trary evidence can be produced; but does not the men¬ tion of the death of Moses, and the occurrence in the Pentateuch of names not used in his time, militate against the second position? Mr. B. There can be no doubt that the last chapter of Deuteronomy is a conclusion which the subject re¬ quired, and as such was added by Joshua, Samuel, or Ezra. If language was used in general such as could not have been used in the time of Moses, it would strongly have militated against the genuineness of his writings; but the mere alteration of a name, which had been forgotten, to the one which afterwards became com¬ mon, and manifestly done by a later writer to make the narrative intelligible, cannot affect the authority of the work at large. Maria. But does not historical fact invalidate these writings? Mr. B. If the writings assigned to Solomon be admit¬ ted, and how they can be denied I cannot see, those ascribed to Moses must be long anterior to any other history extant; and both on this account, and from re¬ ference to the country in which it was produced, far more likely to be true than any other record which has 58 What are the probable reasons for the affirmative of it'!—59 What does Edward say of the testimony of the learned respecting; them!—60 Of what does Mr. B. say there is no doubt!—61 What does he say would; and what would not affect the authority of those ancient books'!—62 Does the historical fact invalidate these writings'! 200 CONVERSATIONS ON THE come down to us. If, therefore, there were a difference of statement as to historical fact, this record, whether spurious or genuine, as the more ancient, and as pro¬ duced in the countries where the truth could be best as¬ certained, has the first claims. Greece and Italy were then in a state of barbarism, and probably Asia Minor also. The two great kingdoms were those of Assyria and Egypt. From the former, undoubtedly, came Abra¬ ham, the father of the Jewish nation, and from the latter came Moses. Palestine was the great medium of com¬ munication between the two, and in the state in which society then was, from all the accounts transmitted to us of Abraham, Moses, and their descendants, from no other source was a true history more likely to proceed; and to compare the authority of writers who lived from 1000 to 1500 years subsequently to the period in ques¬ tion against a document produced at that period, a docu¬ ment also which, from its very nature, must have ad¬ hered to truth in common facts, appears to me as absurd a method of procedure as any well can be. Maria. The statements of the Pentateuch differ, then, from those of other writers? Mr. B. In some things they do; but in many they agree. Now the latter certainly confirms the authority of the Pentateuch, whereas the former can never invali¬ date it; for if no question of religion were involved, the statements of the Greeks and Romans, even taking their own accounts in the most favourable manner, could not admit of competition with those of an author living at a much earlier period, and in the very countries, the his¬ tory of which is the subject of dispute. In two excel¬ lent works of Dr. Gray, the “ Key to the Old Testament ,” and “ The Connexion of Sacred and Profane Literature,” you will find nearly all that you can desire to know, relating to the elucidation of the Old Testament, and to 63 What is said of Greece, Italy, Assyria, and Egypt, at the time of which we are speaking'!—64 Why is it probable that a history of those times, might have come from such a source, as we suppose?—65 What ap¬ pears to Mr. B. absured?—66 Do the statements of the Pentateuch differ from those of other writers?—67 What two works of Dr. Gray are named, and what is said of them? o EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 201 these works I would refer you in general; and it is in¬ deed necessary that you should read these or some works of a similar kind, that you may know the facts of the case, and be aware how grossly the Old Testament is commonly misrepresented by the opponents of Chris¬ tianity. You will find, I think, also, that no historical fact, asserted in this volume, has been disproved from the nature of the case, or contradictory statements in different parts; and when you consider that in many most important points the Scripture account is fully con¬ firmed, you will perceive that the credibility of the whole, as to historical accuracy, is most probable, and conse¬ quently the genuineness of the records. We cannot, indeed, in general argue from the truth of the contents of a book to its genuineness, nor, on the other hand, from its spuriousness to its incredibility; but in the case of most of these books the evidence for the genuineness is evidence for the credibility also, and more particularly in the case of the Pentateuch, there appears no possi¬ ble reason why we should run counter to the general belief of the East in denying either the facts or the author. Edward. If the general credibility of the Pentateuch be admitted, it would seem arguing merely for the sake of objecting to deny the author to be Moses. But does not the miraculous part of the narrative lay us under the necessity of rejecting it? Mr. B. By no means; for whenever the narrative was published, the same insuperable difficulties would attach to its reception on any other supposition than that of its genuineness and authority. For the Pentateuch itself supposes observances to be kept up in remembrance of these miracles, which observances must, therefore, have existed, or these writings could not, in the nature of things, have become the law of the people. If no Pass- over was kept, no account, of course, could he given of 68 What does Mr. B. say of the historical facts asserted in this volume! —69 What does he say may not in general be done; and what peculiarity in the present case exists!—70 What observation does Edward introduce in relation to the credibility of the Pentateuch, and what question does he add!—71 How does Mr. B. reply to him! 202 CONVERSATIONS ON THE its origin; if it was kept, no account, involving heavy duties, could be admitted by a whole nation, but that which they knew to be correct. Maria. But may not false accounts, the publication of which is removed at a great distance of time from the date of the events themselves, prevail ? Mr. B. Not in the case where they bind to a severe law, for which no equivalent is given, no reason assign¬ ed, but as connected with the truth of those accounts. In this case also you have not a great distance of time to help you; for the writings ascribed to Moses could not have been produced long after the time in which he lived, and the law refers to the miracles as having taken place before the eyes of his contemporaries. You will find Leslie’s Rules, as applied to the miracles of the Pentateuch, of great effect. If, again, any interval had elapsed after which a good opportunity might be afforded of bringing forward the Pentateuch, and ascribing it to Moses, of laying hold of customs, and accounting for their observance by a relation of miracles, you must suppose the author of such an attempt would only incul¬ cate what he was certain would be well received. Now I venture to assert, that from all that we know of human nature, from all that we know of history, and from all that we can collect as to this particular people, the Pen¬ tateuch never could have been so forced upon the peo¬ ple as a law of absolute authority; to say nothing of the incredibility of inventing such a law, which confined national and personal ambition within such narrow limits. Edward. If the Jewish law was not of divine origin, the people were cruelly deceived. Mr. B. It is incredible that they would have permitted themselves to be cruelly deceived. In what other in¬ stance was ever such severe legislation effected? What other instance can be produced of a people thus imposed upon ? 72 What question does Maria ask respecting false accounts'!—73 What answer does Mr. B. give her!—74 If any attempt had been made subse¬ quent to the time of Moses, to produce such a work, and to ascribe it to him, at what would the author probably have aimed!—75 What does Mr. B. venture to assert on the subject!—76 What is remarked of the Jew3, on the supposition that the Jewish law was not of divine origin! EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 203 Marta. But the Jews are a very peculiar people. Mr. B. So they have become; but we do not observe in the history of the Jews, more than any other race, a disposition to confine themselves within a narrow tract of land; to deny themselves; to submit to a severe round of duty; to live by faith rather than by sight. Some motive or other must have given rise to so extra¬ ordinary an attempt as the legislation of the Pentateuch; but what motive could produce it, in case a divine origin be not admitted, is not easy to conjecture. If this legis¬ lation were human, unquestionably its author was a man of the very highest intellect; but how such a man could trust to a perpetual miracle, is what no ingenuity can solve. He puts the nation under a peculiar providence, and binds it to the observance of these laws, under the penalty of ruin if they forsake them. Edward. Then you regard the Jews as, in some meas¬ ure, supported by a continued miracle; or that there must have been a continuance of particular providential agency to have supported their peculiar establishment ? Mr. B. Such there undoubtedly was, according to the sacred records; and such there must have been, to ena¬ ble them to observe the law originally given. Edivard. This is assuming a great deal. Mr. B. Not more than what a strict adherence to truth requires, and not more than the subject will bear: it cannot be disproved. Edward. Neither can it be proved; and belief in a continual interposition of Divine Providence is more than ought to be required without proof. Mr. B. I am willing to own that the whole, as a de¬ viation from the usual course of things, requires more proof than it would had it been accordant therewith. I am willing also to grant that the period is too remote for me to bring positive proof; but, on the other hand, the fact of any one miracle being established, no reason can 77 What does Mr. B. say of the Jews, in reply to the remark of Maria, that they are a very peculiar people 1 ?—78 If this legislation were human, what is presumed of the author!--79 How were the Jews supported 1 ?— 80 What reply does Mr. B. make to Edward, that the idea of their being supported by miracle is a great presumption?—81 What is he willing to admit, as to the peculiarity of this case? 204 CONVERSATIONS ON THE be assigned why fifty others, connected with it, may not also be true, provided the general object of their per¬ formance be the same. If the children of Israel were miraculously brought out of Egypt for a particular pur¬ pose, no reason can be given against the alleged fact of their having been miraculously preserved in Canaan for the same purpose. We cannot determine either one way or the other, as in a matter of demonstration ; but the assumption made by the author of the Pentateuch is, to me, a strong argument for its genuineness and credibility. Maria. But is the assumption so decided? Mr. B. The following passages will determine:— c c And the Lord spake unto Moses in Mount Sinai, saying, Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, AVhen ye come into the land which I give you, then shall the land keep a sabbath unto the Lord. Six years thou shalt sow thy field, and six years thou shalt prune thy vineyard, and gather in the fruit thereof; but in the seventh year shall be a sabbath of rest unto the land, a sabbath for the Lord: thou shalt neither sow thy field nor prune thy vine¬ yard. That which groweth of its own accord of thy har¬ vest thou shalt not reap, neither gather the grapes of thy vine undressed: for it is a year of rest unto the land.”— Lev. xxv. 1—5. A similar command is then given relative to the ob¬ servance of the jubilee of the fiftieth year, and the divine authority of the command is put upon the following inter¬ position of Providence:—“And if ye shall say, What shall we eat the seventh year? behold, we shall not sow, nor gather in our increase: Then Iivill command my bless¬ ing upon you in the sixth year, and it shall bring forth fruit for three years. And ye shall sow the eighth year, and eat yet of old fruit until the ninth year; until her fruits come in ye shall eat of the old store.”— Lev. xxv. 20—22. Edward. But a daring profession of this kind is not 82 How is this to be illustrated by reference to the children of Israel 1 ? 83 What passages of scripture are quoted in reply to the question of Ma¬ ria, respecting the assumption made by the author of the Pentateuch?— 84 What similar command was given?—85 In what manner and for what purpose does Edward allude to Mahomet? '• EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 206 inconsistent with the idea of imposture; for Mahomet sent forth the Koran as a miracle, and many others have made similar pretensions. Mr. B. You cannot, however, I think, bring forward any instance of a religion being placed upon a footing similar to this. The pretended miracles which at various times have been offered or promised by pretenders to di¬ vine communications, were of a very different character to this; nor am I aware of any instance in which the faith of those who professed to believe in them was put to such a test as this. It is not easy to conceive of any miracle that could more clearly establish the identity of Him who spoke unto Moses with the Creator and Governor of the world, or which spoke so immediately to the comprehen¬ sion of all, “The Lord he is God; the Lord he is God.” Nor can it be supposed that any one but. Moses ever would have used such a declaration; for not only is the observance of this command connected with a promise, but the non-observance of it with a curse. Of the fact of its observance or non-observance, and of the fulfilment of that promise or that curse, all were equally able to judge; and therefore it cannot be imagined that any one would, after the time of Moses, produce a law couched in terms that must have been its own destruction. Maria. Any person possessed of sufficient talents to forge a code of laws, like those in the Pentateuch, would never have exposed the whole to such a test, at once so unnecessary and so fatal to imposture. Mr. B. This is also not the only test of the same kind; but we have not time to consider more; and the P( nta- teuch itself will afford the best proofs of its genuineness. But, again, if the Pentateuch be not genuine, the other Scriptures which refer to it cannot be genuine; and if no part of the Old Testament, ascribed to authors before the time of Ezra, be genuine, by whom could they have been composed? Certainly not by any one individual, 86 How does Mr. B. reply to this!—87 How is this illustrated in the case of Moses!—88 Of what does Mr. B. say we are equally able to judge! —89 What does Maria’suppose of one capable of forging such a code of laws!—90 But if the Pentateuch be not genuine, what follows respecting die other scriptures! 18 206 CONVERSATIONS ON THE nor yet by any number of contemporaries acting in con¬ cert, the internal evidence being most decisively against either supposition; but if these books were written in different ages, and yet are all spurious, we are compelled to acknowledge a miracle for no purpose against them, in order to escape the acknowledgment of much more reasonable miracles contained in them. Maria. The supposition of imposture seems attended with insuperable difficulties, as connected with the au¬ thors of these books, both with reference to their authen¬ ticity and credibility. Mr. B. And their reception by the Jews only involves still more difficulties. In defence of this volume, and the faith they build upon it, what have they not suffered! yet, look at its contents, and where is the ground of at¬ tachment, if any doubt had ever existed among them as to its truth? What generation would ever have taken up such a yoke of bondage, had it been unknown to their fathers, or destitute of the evidence of miracles? What could induce them to continue to hold in veneration rec¬ ords so disgraceful to them, but a conviction that their origin was such as is alleged? Edward. I do not think their belief in the Old Testa¬ ment has ever been seriously questioned; but this is only their belief. Mr. B. Still of how great force is the belief of a nation situated as they have’ been in a matter of this nature? If it cannot be proved that these writings are spurious, how can the argument, derived both from external and internal evidence, be evaded? The unbelief of other na¬ tions cannot make void belief so attested as theirs has been. We have no coeval testimony against the Old Testament. We have no internal evidence involving absurdity or impossibility. Many of the authors of these books probably little anticipated the scrutiny they-would undergo, and even the latest period which could be as- 91 What admission does Maria allow, on the supposition of imposture in these hooks'?—92 What question does Mr. B introduce, respecting the conduct of the Jews, touching the genuineness of'these books'?—93 What does Edward say of their belief in them?—94 Can the argument be evad¬ ed, provided these writings cannot be proved spurious! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 207 signed for their production was not that in which works would appear which would stand the test of ages. The religion of the Old Testament is such as no other country # ever has produced where that was unknown. It has al¬ ways been the great delight of infidels to despise the country, and ridicule the people, whence these records have proceeded; apparently forgetful that the more con¬ tempt they heap upon this nation, the more difficult it becomes to account for their worlds. . CONVERSATION XIV. Mr. B. We have hitherto considered the evidences for the Old and New Testaments separate from each other, and in either case found the strongest probability for the truth of each. By connecting them, we shall increase those probabilities to a degree amounting so near to cer¬ tainty, that it is only exceeded by mathematical demon- strr tiojj. Maria. By what means do you effect this? Mr. B. By showing that the whole Bible only contains a succession of revelations connected with various dis¬ pensations, of which each was designed to be preparato¬ ry for that which was to follow; so that the Old Testa¬ ment is completed and perfected in the New, to which it formed a necessary introduction. Edward. This merely depends, then, upon the history of the Bible? Mr. B. The Scriptures are of course our only guide, and since at present we have every reason to believe they are from God, we must follow their leading implicitly. The knowledge of the great Creator of all things, which may be derived from observation on his works, is of 95 Wha^ is said of the religion of the Old Testament * 1 ? 1 How have the evidences'of the Old and New Testament been consid¬ ered, and how may the Weight of evidence be still further augmented?—2 How may this be done?—3 What is our only guide in matters of religion? 208 CONVERSATIONS ON THE course very limited; nor can the experience of mankind, as to his providence, add much. We “ believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.” As we do not perceive any fixed law of reward in this life, we hope for it in another state of being, to which we appear to be fast hastening, for which this pres¬ ent state seems only preparatory, and which is to us, therefore, of the utmost importance Edward. From the Scriptures we learn that these opin¬ ions are just, so that we may proceed safely, being at least so far agreed. Mr. B. From the Scriptures we also learn many things which otherwise we could not have known, and of a nature to prove the necessity of a divine revelation,- as well as its expediency. Maria. But these we only admit on the authority of Scripture, having no further testimony to them. Mr. B. Not exactly so: even to these additional state¬ ments, the certainty as well as the knowledge of which we owe to Scripture alone, general experience bears some testimony, though not sufficient of itself to estab¬ lish any thing. From the attributes of the Creator, we conclude that his creation must have been originally “very good,” which the Scripture confirms. From the present state of the world we conclude, that evil has been introduced into it; but further than this we cannot go. It is the Scripture alone that can explain to u^ how it was that, though “ God made man upright,” the creature has so far departed from his Creator. Edward. But is the Scripture account of the fall of man from a state of original purity to be received lite¬ rally? Mr. B. Upon this subject various opinions have oeen entertained; but I confess I am unable to perceive any trace in the Bible itself of any other than a literal inter¬ pretation. The Bible unquestionably, when its eviden¬ ces are called in question, must be allowed to be its own 4 What doctrine of scripture is here named as of great value!—5 What do we learn from the scriptures'!—6 From what source do these statements of scripture receive somp confirmation!—7 Is the scripture account of the foil of man to be received literally! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 209 interpreter, let the consequences be what they may. I would reject, therefore, altogether, any attempt to accom¬ modate the language of Scripture to the wishes of those to whom it may be addressed. Whatsoever is contained therein is either contrary to fact and possibility, or not: if the former, the whole must be rejected; if the latter, it must be retained, in consequence of the probability already shown that it is from God; for however great the witness of man may be, “the witness of God is greater.” Maria. What other interpretation than a literal one has there ever been brought forward? Mr. B. The enemies of Christianity have attempted to overthrow some branches of its evidences, by resorting to a figurative or allegorical interpretation; and some of its friends have likewise had recourse to the same aid, in order to defend particular parts which have excited the strongest efforts on the parts of their adversaries. It ought not, however, to be asked, “How can the ques¬ tion be most readily decided either way?” but, “What decision do the Scriptures themselves give?” If they rest.their claims upon a foundation which will not sup¬ port them, from that very fact they are overthrown; but if they rely upon a defence which will indeed support them, though not in the way we should have expected, nevertheless, since by that defence they stand, and their authority is established, by that defence we must abide also, in preference to any other which to us might have appeared better. Now, the narrative of the fall of man is given without any intimation of allegory; it is alluded to in various parts of the sacred volume as fact, is ar¬ gued upon as such, and therefore as such must be re¬ ceived. Edward. But this exposes Christianity to greater dan¬ ger, does it not? Mr. B. To no danger which it is not able to overcome; 8 What does Mr. B. say of rejecting attempts to accommodate the lan¬ guage of scripture to the wishes of individuals '?—9 What question is ask¬ ed by Maria respecting the fain—10 What two classes of persons have attempted to explain away its literal meaning'?—11 How should this mat¬ ter be decided!—12 In what manner is the narrative of the fall of man given'?—13 Edward inquires if this does not expose Christianity to greater danger—What is the reply of Mr. B.1 210 CONVERSATIONS ON THE but even were this not the case, in inquiring into the truth of the religion itself, we have no right to make conclu¬ sions, merely with reference to its advantage. Connected with the fall of man we find the first of a series of promises made by the Creator to mankind, of a future salvation from the fatal consequences of that fall, the promise, unconnected with those that followed it, more calculated to give hope than information. In a succession of revelations afterwards made, we find this promise confirmed, the manner of its fulfilment shadowed out, and the consequences enlarged upon. Again, we find the whole of the dispensations of the great Governor of the world conducted with reference to its fulfilment. When the wickedness of man became so great on the earth that the most terrible destruction swept away its inhabitants, one family was spared to preserve the human race alive. When a second general corruption of man¬ kind was taking place, one family was again severed from the rest to preserve the knowledge of the true God. Through a long course of time the descendants of that house were prepared by a necessary discipline foi* the accomplishment of the promise. They were separated, as a nation, from the rest of the world; were placed un¬ der a special providence; were commanded to observe a law which was designed to teach the nature and impor¬ tance of the salvation hereafter to be revealed; and were made, unconsciously, the means of preserving the strong¬ est proofs of the reality of the fulfilment of the great promise. Connected with that promise, as again and again confirmed by holy men of God, were now added a vast number of prophecies, the design of which was to fix unequivocally the truth of its accomplishment, or to develope important facts more or less connected with it. Maria. You will bring in, then, the aid of prophecy at last: it has surprised me that you have not made use of it before. 14 What is intimately connected in scripture with the fall of man'?—15 What'merciful interpositions of the Almighty are on record, when the gen¬ erations of men became corrupted?—16 What is recorded of the descend¬ ants of that house?—17 What were afterwards connected with the great promise of man’s salvation? 211 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. Mr. B. Thus the whole of the Old Testament is pre¬ paratory to some greater dispensation which was to fol¬ low. The Christian asserts, that the New Testament contains that better covenant; that the salvation has been wrought; that the Jewish dispensation is superseded; and thaj no other revelation will be given from heaven till the consummation of all things; that nevertheless all is now regulated with reference to the Gospel of Christ, and of this we are to have confirmation in the fulfilment of prophecy, and in the enduring nature and excellency of his religion. Edward. But many of these particulars require proof: some formidable objections lie against the conclusion; and a single false declaration, which professes to be of divine origin, overthrows the whole. Mr. B. For the establishment of the general outline which I have given, the whole Bible itself is necessary; and here it seems proper to insist upon the necessity of every one, disposed to be sceptical on the subject, taking the trouble of giving the whole Bible at least one serious reading from beginning to end, before he decide against it. Every one able to do it, ought to read it in the orig¬ inal languages; but where this cannot be done, certainly no inquirer into truth should suffer himself to be preju¬ diced against any part, till he is certain that no error ex¬ ists in the translation, and that he understands that trans¬ lation aright. Maria. But how can this be done? Mr. B. For common use, there are the works of many learned men in English, in addition to our excellent trans¬ lation, which may easily be referred to, and whence a pretty correct idea of the whole may be obtained. But where these books cannot be obtained, even the common¬ est Bible, with marginal references, when well read, will perhaps do more to confirm the faith of the believer than the best defence of Christianity extant. 18 What does the Christian assert of the two dispensations, under which God has been pleased to carry forward the purposes of hi? grace?—19 Wlint objection does Edward here offer to the outline of the foregoing hy¬ pothesis?—20 For the establishment of this outline, what is needful?—21 What is said of reading the scriptures in the original languages?—22 How* can this be done 1 * 212 CONVERSATIONS ON THE Edward. In asserting the literal interpretation of Scrip¬ ture, is it meant that every expression should be under¬ stood literally? Mr. B. Certainly not, where the nature of the lan¬ guage or customs of the people had established the ap¬ plication of one set of words to ideas beyond the literal meaning of the words. By objecting to any other than the plain and direct interpretation of Scripture, my only object is to secure that meaning which the sacred writ¬ ers meant to convey, and the sense in which one under¬ stood another. If what they wrote had been written and received as figurative or allegorical, as such I would re¬ ceive it in examining their claims; but when the sense conveys no other than a simple relation of facts, as such only can I understand it. Edward. But if uncertainty as to the interpretation of prophecy exist, as I have heard it affirmed, no certain conclusions can be drawn from it; and if the writers of the New Testament understood the language of the Old in a different sense to that in which others do, who is to decide the question? Mr. B. The interpretation of prophecy is a subject which at all times requires peculiar caution; for by the very nature of the language in which they are couched, the prophecies are frequently made only intelligible by the event; and where the fulfilment of the prophecy as well as the prediction takes place at a period greatly re¬ moved from the age in which we live, it is not surprising that some degree of obscurity should rest upon them. Edward. Is not this in favour of my objection? An obscure revelation is almost equivalent to no revelation at all. Mr. B. There is no obscurity in those parts of the Scrip¬ tures which are given as express revelations of the will of God, by which we are to govern our conduct. With re¬ gard to the obscurity attendant upon prophecy, the na- 23 Wliat question does Edward ask, as to the manner of pursuing this investigation!—24 How does Mr. B. answer him!—25 On what account does Edward suppose that no certain conclusions can be drawn respecting •the interpretation of prophecy!—26 Why does the interpretation of proph- ' ecy require peculiar caution!—27 In what portions of scripture is there no obscurity! EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 213 ture of the subject, in some measure, explains it. If the Old Testament had presented a full delineation of the future, in cases where no immediate exertion of divine power was requisite, the fulfilment might have been im¬ puted to design on the part of man, and the evidence of its divine origin thus obscured, if not destroyed. It was necessary so to present the future, as to show that all was foreseen, but that the prophecy should not be the cause of its own fulfilment. In points where no human poiver could fulfil the prediction, we find the declarations deci¬ sive, and developed to a very great extent. Maria. Such I recollect is the case with regard to Isaiah’s predictions of the birth of the Messiah, and of the miracles which were to be wrought at his coming Mr. B. And even where supernatural agency was not requisite to fulfil the prophecy, we sometimes find very detailed and accurate delineations, but principally in cases where the least possible chance existed for a fulfil¬ ment arising from design, as in the circumstantial detail of the nature of the death and burial of the Messiah Maria. In both these classes of predictions there is no appearance of any thing but a literal fulfilment being in¬ tended; and a literal fulfilment certainly took place, ac¬ cording to the New Testament. Mr. B. We can also produce a. sufficient number of prophecies, on which no difference of opinion has existed between the Jews who lived previously to the time of our Lord, or his contemporaries, and the writers of the New Testament: with regard to others, we can certainly prove the interpretation of later times adopted by the Jews false and absurd; and in general can satisfactorily account for any difference of opinion between us and them. You will observe also, that with regard to the Jews, to whom the argument from prophecy was first 28 What difficulty would have arisen from a full delineation, in the Old Testament, of future events!—29 What was therefore necessary!—30 Wh at case of clear prediction is remembered by Maria!—31 In what other cases may we sometimes find very detailed and accurate delineations in prophecy!—32 What does Maria remark of these two classes of pre¬ dictions!—33 Are there any prophecies on which no difference of opinion has existed!—34 And what is said of other prophecies about which no reasonable difficulty is known now to exist! 214 CONVERSATIONS ON THE addressed, “Their agreement, where we have records, is a good presumption that in the rest, where records are deficient, they were also with us in the sense of those Scriptures; to which the numbers of Jews converted to the Gospel by virtue of such Scripture testimonies gives an additional strength. For it cannot be thought by any but sceptics, that such numbers of all degrees of Jews, at that time learned, rulers, priests, scribes, of all sects, men by their profession and station obliged to know the Scriptures, should forsake the religion they were most tenacious of, upon the authority of texts that made noth¬ ing for the religion they went over to, or were evidently against it, without prospect of worldly advantage, to the certain hazard of their lives, yea, and of God’s favour too after death (which they hoped for), did not they act sincerely. Fancy as you will a weakness or enthusiasm in those that set about converting the Jews in the meth- od of impertinent citations; their weakness could not make their proofs strong, nor infuse credulity into men certainly qualified to judge of their proofs, as having the Old and Neil) Testament in their hands, and who, after comparing them together, did yet assent to the truth of their reasoning, and became disciples.” Maria. Whose observations are these? Mr. B. They occur in the Introduction of Bishop Chan¬ dler’s Defence of Christianity, from the Prophecies of the Old Testament; a work of great value, from the pro¬ found rabbinical learning of the author. In this work he undertakes to prove the following positions:— “1. That there was a general expectation of a Mes- sias to come at the time that our Lord Jesus Christ ap¬ peared; which was the tradition of their ancestors from the ages before that up to the age next to the prophets themselves. “2. To support this expectation, there were in their Scriptures express literal prophecies that singly concern¬ ed the Messiah. “ 3. They had also typical prophecies to the same ef- 35 What is the substance of the quotation here made 1 .—*36 What is said of the work from which it is made”?—37 What are the two first proposi¬ tions he undertakes to prove 1—38 What are the third and fourth ones'? EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 215 feet, the literal meaning of which was intended to be ap¬ plied to the Messias. “4. The exceptions taken to some texts, cited from the Old in the New Testament, are frivolous, and ought to cast no discredit on the Gospel wherein they are found. “5. The allegoric or other methods of citing and ex¬ plaining Scripture, which the Jews were accustomed to, though different from the manner of arguing which the later ages have confined themselves to, might justly be followed, as it is sometimes by the writers of the New Testament, according to the allowed maxims of disputa¬ tion, in reasoning with Jews; or, in other words, the apostles deserve no censure for using arguments ad homi- nem. tc 6. The sense fixed by Christ and his apostles on the prophecies of the Old Testament, supposing many of those prophecies capable of suiting other persons and times than those of the Messias, is certainly preferred to any other sense they may possibly be taken in.”— Chand. Int. p. 16. These positions are, I think, satisfactorily established by the learned and candid author, and you will find the whole of his proofs well deserving of attention. I have read few books on the prophecies with equal satisfaction. Edward. What prophecies does he adduce as certainly and exclusively relating to the Messias? Mr. B„ He selects the following as immediately and solely in the obvious and literal sense, according to scholas¬ tic rules, referring to him. “ 1. Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the mes¬ senger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts.”— Mai. iii. 1. p. 52. “2. Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet be¬ fore the coming of the great and dreadful day of the 39 What is the fifth one 1 ?—40 And what is the sixth one?—41 What does Mr. B. say of these propositions?—42 What is the first prophecy he adduces as certainly and exclusively relating to Messias?—43 What is the second one? 216 CONVERSATIONS ON THE Lord: and he shall turn the hearts of the fathers to (or with) the children, and the heart of the children to (or with) the fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.”— Mai. iv. 5, 6, p. 64. “3. For thus saith the Lord of hosts, yet once, it is a little while,, and I will shake the heavens, and the earth, and the sea, and the dry land; and I will shake all nations, and the desire of all nations shall come: and I will fill this house with glory, saith the Lord. The silver is mine, and the gold is mine, saith the Lord of hosts. The glory of this latter house shall be greater than of the former; and in this place will I give peace, saith the Lord of hosts.— Hag. ii. 6—9, p. 71. “4. Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, 0 daughter of Jerusalem; behold, thy King cometh unto thee; the righteous one, and that Saviour, lowly and riding upon an ass, and upon a colt, the foal of an ass.” Zech. ix. 9, p. 84. “ 5. And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and supplications; and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his first-born.— Zech. xii. 10, p. 88. 6. “ And in the days of these kings shall the God of heaven setup a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and 'consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever. Forasmuch as thou sawest, that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold.— Dan. ii. 44, 45, p. 95. “7. I saw in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of Man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations and lan- 44 What is the third!—45 And the fourth 1 ?—46 The fifth 1 ?—47 The sixth 1 ?—48 What is the seventh one 1 ? EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 217 gaages. should serve him: his dominion is an everlast¬ ing dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom shall not be destroyed.— Van. vii. 13, 14, p. 106. “8. Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, to seal up sins, to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most holy. Know, therefore, and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to build Jerusalem again unto Mes¬ siah the prince, shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the streets shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, and they shall not be his (people); and the people of the prince that shall come, shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and at the end of the war desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week; and in one part of that week he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease; and upon the battlement shall be the idols of the desolator until the consummation, viz. of God’s wrath, and that determined, shall be poured upon the desolator. -r-Van. ix. 24—27, p. 109. “ 9. But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been of old, from everlasting.— Mic. v. 2, p. 124. “ 10. For the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it (or he) shall speak and not lie. Though he tarry, wait for him.— Hab. ii. 3, 4, p. 132. “11. In that day will I raise up the tabernacle of David that is fallen, and close up the breaches thereof; and I will raise up his ruins, and I will build it as in the days of old: that they may possess the remnant of Edom, and of all the heathen which are called by my name, saith the Lord that doth this.— Amos, ix' 11, 12, p. 139. .49 Wliat is the eighth one!— 50 What is the ninth!— 51 What is the tenth of these propositions!— 52 What is the eleventh! 19 218 CONVERSATIONS ON THE “ 12. Behold, my servant shall prosper; he shall bo exalted and extolled, and be very high. As many were astonished at thee; (his visage was so marred, more than any other man, and his form more than the sons of men ;) so shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which was not told them shall they see, and that which they had not heard shall they consider. Who hath believed our re¬ port? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? For he shall grow up as a tender plant before him, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor come¬ liness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him. He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: as a hiding of faces from us, he was despised, and we esteemed him not. Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows, u'hen we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed. All we, like sheep, have gone astray; we have turned back every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid upon him the iniquity of us all. He was oppressed (or rather the debt was demanded) and he was afflicted, yet he opened not his mouth. He is brought as a lamb to the slaughter; and as a sheep before her shearers is dumb, so he opened not his mouth. He was taken off by authority, and by judgment, and who shall declare his generation (or lineage ?) when he shall be cut off from the land of the living, and for the trans¬ gression of my people stricken. And he (the people) made his grave with the wicked; but it shall be with the rich after his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased God to bruise him: he hath put him to grief: if he shall make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, that shall prolong their days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hands. Because of the travail of his soul he shall see his desire, and be satisfied: by 53 And what is the twelfth of them'! EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 219 his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many, whose iniquities he shall bear. Therefore will I divide him a portion of the great, and he shall 1 divide the spoil of the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors, and bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.”— Isaiah, lii. 13, &c. p. 147. Now if Jesus of Nazareth be not the Messiah, every one of these prophecies has proved false; if he be, every one has been accomplished. Their integrity, their in¬ terpretation, their application to the Messias, and him alone, are certain, as Bishop Chandler shows at large. They limit the time and place of his birth, and of his death; they show the circumstances which were to pre¬ cede his coming, those which would attend his life, and those which follow his death; and by all the testimony we can collect upon the subject, in every particular have these prophecies been fulfilled; for our Lord did appear in the second Temple, was preceded by John the Baptist in the spirit and power of Elias, and did enter Jerusalem in the manner predicted. He was born at Bethlehem; he was pierced and cut off at Jerusalem, at the time ap¬ pointed; Jerusalem was made desolate, and the kingdom of Jesus was established, has continued to this day, and continually advances in every part of the gtobe. Edward. The collected force of this is indeed very great; for the evidence is unexceptionable, the prophe¬ cies being in the hands of enemies, and their fulfilment matter of fact known unto all, as we before ascertained. Mr. B. And of these facts these very prophecies form a most irresistible confirmation; for from the beginning the facts were alleged as fidfihnents of the 'prophecies, and yet neither the one nor the other could be denied. But if these are acknowledged, who will deny the appli¬ cation of the other prophecies to our Lord ? Who can doubt that of him alone David wrote, when he said, 54 If Jesus of Nazareth be not the Messiah, what may be said of these prophecies'?—55 In what particulars were these prophecies literally appli¬ cable to him?—56 What does Edward say of the collected force of the , argument, as it now stands?—57 What does Mr. B. say of the above facts as connected with the prophecies named?—58 What is the passage quoted from David respecting our Lord? 220 CONVERSATIONS ON THE “ They pierced my hands and my feet; they stand staring and looking upon me: they parted my garments among them, and for my vesture they cast lots:—all they that see me laugh me to scorn: they shootout the lip, they shake the head, saying, He trusted on the Lord that he would deliver him; let him deliver him, seeing he delighteth in him :— they gave me also gall for my meat, and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink 1” Maria. All those beautiful and affecting Psalms be¬ come of infinitely greater importance and interest when thus explained by the event. Mr. j B. Of whom also but our Lord did the Psalmist write, when he rejoiced that “his sold would not be left in hell;” and that the Lord would “not suffer his Holy One to see corruption ?” Whose triumph did he celebrate, if not that of the risen Son of God, in the words, “ Thou hast ascended up on High—thou hast led captivity captive; thou hast received gifts for men, even for the rebellious also, that the Lord God might dwell among them ?” We have in the testimony of prophecy to our Lord, not the agree¬ ment of a few particulars, or the accomplishment of vague and intermediate predictions; but the prophecies are such as could not possibly be foreseen by human knowledge, such as could not possibly be fulfilled by hu¬ man artifice: in detail they are unexceptionable, and in the mass irresistible. CONVERSATION XV. Edward. The prophecies you brought forward in our last conversation have so strongly impressed my mind with the certainty of the argument thence derived in fa¬ vour of the divine origin of the Scriptures, that I should conceive their evidence irresistible, had I not heard that 59 What are the two questions proposed by Mr. B. in the last para¬ graph of this conversation'!—60 And with what additional remark on the testimony of prophecy does he conclude the conversation'! 1 With what observation does Edward commence the fifteenth conver¬ sation! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 221 the interpretation of the prophecies was very doubtful in all eases, and that many eminent men had given up the arguments derived from them. Mr. B. That some eminent men may have doubted re¬ specting them may be true; but this proves little, for the majority have acknowledged the force of the argument. Those who have studied the subject of the prophecies most carefully have generally been the most zealous advocates. Maria. But there may be something in the subject cal¬ culated to carry away the mind from fact to supposition; and those who have studied this subject most, perhaps, have not given decided proofs of their acuteness in others. Mr. B. In making this assertion, you are falling into the very fault you condemn; for the fads of the case are altogether against your hypothesis. Bacon, Newton, and Warburton, names not easily equalled, stand pre¬ eminent among the advocates for prophecy. Yet of these, the first most strenuously recommends the study of it, as calculated to throw' light upon history; the sec¬ ond himself wrote upon it; and the last founded a lec¬ ture, for the purpose of keeping the public attention fixed upon it, and calling forth the labours of the learned in its elucidation. Edward. Was there not a Bishop Newton, who wrote upon the prophecies, as well as Sir Isaac ? Mr. B. Bishop Newton’s work is one of the most use¬ ful books which we have upon the subject, and is not less interesting in itself than important for the immense body of proof which it contains. He takes the prophecies in chronological order, and brings forward such a number of testimonies to their fulfilment, from profane as well as sacred authors, that little more need be desired on the subject. Edward. But has it not been conjectured, that some of the prophecies must have been written after the events, from the accuracy of the fulfilment ? _ _____ _ , _ . _ » 2 What reply is given by Mr. B.t—8 Maria here makes a suggestion— what is it!—4 How does Mr. B. reply to it?—5 What does he say of the work of Itislnp Newton on the prophecies'!—6 What question is asked by Edward as to the time at which some of the prophecies wese written! 19 * 222 CONVERSATIONS ON THE Mr. B. Porphyry jnaintained an opinion of this hind with regard to the book of Daniel. He found no diffi¬ culty in applying it to the historical events which had occurred; but, being determined to reject the conclusion to which this agreement would naturally lead, he argued that it must have been written subsequently; whereas, there is nothing more certain than that the book was in existence prior to the events in question. Maria. His opposition has then become advantageous to the cause which he sought to overthrow? Mr. B. In this case, as in the arguments of Celsus against the miracles of our Lord, the evidence of our adversaries is of the greatest consequence, as proving the facts; for it is not very cifficult to overthrow their false reasoning. Edward. What other prophecies are generally brought forward in defence of the Scriptures, besides those relat¬ ing to our Lord Jesus Christ? * Mr. B. They are principally those relative to the Jews, those relative to the Christian church, and those relative to the destruction of great cities and empires more imme¬ diately connected with the Jewish or Christian dispensa¬ tion. There are some others of a more general nature also highly interesting, and some, on which considerable obscurity now rests, of less importance, but still deserv¬ ing of attention. The prophecies which predict the dis¬ persion of the Jews are peculiarly interesting, as their fulfilment is yet before our eyes; and those which have reference to the destruction of Jerusalem are scarcely less so, as the historical evidence is so full and explicit that there is no denying the facts. Nothing had occur¬ red in the history of mankind, before the time of Moses, that could suggest such singular denunciations as those contained in the twenty-eighth chapter of the book of Deuteronomy; and we have no instance in later times of any thing bearing any analogy to the singular condition 7 What in reply to him does Mr. B. mention of Porphyry!—8 What comparison is made between Porphyry and Celsus'!—9 Besides those re¬ lating to our Lord, what other prophecies are adduced in defence of the scriptures'!—10 What is said of the scripture denunciations upon the Jews, and of their singular condition! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 223 in which the Jews have been placed. Human foresight could not have predicted the event: human policy could not have fulfilled the prophecy. Maria. I believe the condition of the Jews, scattered among all nations, has always been regarded as one of the greatest difficulties connected with scepticism. Mr. B. The prophecies relative to the Christian church are only in part accomplished, and therefore we can only partially argue from them. There are, howev¬ er, some so decided, that it is not easy to escape the conclusion as to the divine origin of the writings in which they are found. “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience sear¬ ed with a hot iron; forbidding to marry, and command¬ ing to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.”—1 Tim. iv. 1—3. Edward. No one, I think, can doubt the accomplish¬ ment of this prophecy who is not personally interested in denying its application. Mr. B. Equally certain are the prophecies relative to the destruction of cities of the East; for though it might be that a person should be able to foresee the temporary ruin of a place, yet it i-s beyond all calculation of chances that he should foretell the precise nature of their de¬ struction, and especially point out the cases where no restoration should take place. That Nineveh, Babylon, and Tyre, once attracted the attention of the world as its first cities, is as certain as any historical fact can be; that the predictions of their letter and continued desolation were made at a time when they thus existed in splendour, is not less so; and that they have been, and to this day are, totally ruined, is a well-known fact. Maria. It appears altogether beyond human foresight to predict events like these. 11 How does Maria remark on the condition of the Jews'?—12 Are all the prophecies relating to the Christian church accomplished?—13 What very striking one is quoted from St. Paul?—14 What is said of the proph¬ ecies relating to the destruction of cities in the East? 224 CONVERSATIONS ON THE Edward. And certainly no human power could secure the accomplishment of such prophecies. Mr. B. If then, in cases like these, we have positive proof of (he fulfilment of prophecy, it cannot be rational to reject the testimony of history, when it records the fulfilment of other events, where we can have no other proof than that which history affords. In this also we do not ask the testimony of friends, but of enemies: let the Pagan and Jewish historians give their own accounts; we need nothing more. The prophecy and the history, simply placed side by side, will furnish a proof which none of our adversaries can gainsay, much as they may wish to resist the conclusions to which it leads. The only wav of escape for the infidel is to discard the testi¬ mony of all history, and, for consistency’s sake, he might as well discard the testimony of his senses also. Edward. The proof afforded by the accomplishment of prophecy seems in some respects also independent of the rest of the arguments that may be adduced in favour of Christianity; for if we knew nothing of the author of the Pentateuch, we must conclude, from the fulfilment of its prophecies, that it was of divine authority. Maria. And in that case our principal anxiety would be to ascertain its being free from any corruption of the original text. Mr. B. In such an important question it would not, however, be safe to decide on the fulfilment of only one prediction, unless that fulfilment involved a super-human agency; but you have now seen that it is neither upon one prophecy, nor upon one species of predictions, nor upon one prophet alone, .that we rest our conclusions. The prophecies were delivered in a succession of ages, by persons who had no connexion with each other, who do not appear always to have been aware of the extent of their own predictions. Of a great number we can 15 What are the remarks of Maria and Edward on these prophecies'?— 16 What are the remarks of Mr. B. upon them?—17 What is the only way in which he says the infidel can escape the conclusion of the argu¬ ment?—1^ What does Edward then say of the accomplishment of proph¬ ecy?—19 In what does Mr. B. say it would be safe to decide?—20 What does he say of the prophecies in a chronological and numerical point of view? EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 225 positively prove the fulfilment; of many others every probability lies on the same side; and in no case can we ascertain the failure of any of these. For that some are yet unfulfilled is no argument against them, since the time for their fulfilment is not limited; and in those pre¬ dictions where the time was limited we know the proph¬ ecy was fulfilled. Edivard. If you do not regard the obscurity supposed by some to exist on this subject as real, to what would you impute the difficulties connected with it? Mr. B. I would by no means deny that some degree of obscurity does exist in the prophecies themselves: there appears no reason to doubt that some were made designedly obscure, i. e. so far that they should only be understood from the fulfilment; and for this obscurity, in some cases, we may perceive good reason. Thus, if the abrogation of the Mosaic law had been more clearly and fully predicted, it would have been impossible to have pres- rved a due respect for it till the time arrived for its abrogation. Maria. This accounts for a designed obscurity in the j prediction itself, but does not abcount for the obscurity which has attended the fulfilment in some cases. Mr. B. We have no reason to complain if the lapse o ■ time has in some measure thrown an obscurity over the fulfilment of prophecy, which did not exist at the time of the fulfilment. This is only an evil incident to the very nature of the subject, which it would require a miracle to counteract. As to any obscurity arising in the appli¬ cation of prophecies to particular events, I believe it springs principally from our ignorance of the language in which the predictions are recorded, and of the partic¬ ulars of the events in which they were fulfilled. Much of the difficulty connected with this subject also arises from an improper mode of studying the subject. Maria. The subject certainly should not be made an- 21 What question is asked by Edward as to the supposed obscurity of prophecy?—22 How does*Mr. B. reply to him?—23 For what does Maria say that this will account?—24 Of what does Mr. B. say that we have no reason to complain?—25 From what does he presume that much of our difficulty iu this subject arises? 226 CONVERSATIONS ON THE swerable for difficulties, raised by our faults or deficien¬ cies; but how ought it to be studied? Mr. B. It can only be properly studied by a reference to its own intimations on this subject. It must only be judged of with reference to its own pretensions. If the prophetical parts of Scripture had been designed to de- velope the whole train of human events in regular order, we might have just grounds of objection; but we find its language of a very different nature, and by that we must abide. “ The spirit of prophecy is the testimony of Jesus,” says the angel in the Apocalypse; a text which throws great light upon the object of prophecy, and furnishes a satisfactory reply to those who object to the limited na¬ ture of prophecy. Edward. In some cases, however, this is not the case, as in the predictions of the rise and fall of kingdoms. Mr. B. If you attend to the words of the text, you will see that it is correct. You cannot limit it to the mere life and death of our Lord: all the events which in pre¬ ceding affected the circumstances of his birth, which were connected with his life, or which were consequent upon his death; all the'changes of empires which were more immediately influential upon either the Jewish or the Christian church, certainly fall justly within its prov¬ ince. More than this you will hardly find unaccompanied by evident and striking reasons for insertion, either in the prediction itself, or the peculiar circumstances of the nation to whom it was addressed. Edward. Still we might have expected greater order in the delivery of prophecy. Mr. B. If the delivery of prophecy had been merely the selection of certain events by the prophets, and all the future, or all parts of it relative to the testimony re¬ specting Jesus, had been known to them, you might have made this supposition; but St. Peter informs us, that “The prophecy came not in old time by the will of man, 26 In what manner does he say it should be studied and judged oft— 27' What exception does Edward here make!—28 How does Mr. B. reply to this exception!—29 Under what circumstances might greater order in the delivery of prophecy have been expected!—30 Of what are we inform¬ ed by St. Peter! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 227 but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.”—2 Pet. i. 21. It is folly for us to argue against the manner or the order in which the prophecies were delivered, since we have no rule by which to direct our judgment; and all reasonings from our own partial knowledge or views of fitness, when applied to a subject of this nature, which must be regulated by infinite knowledge, are absurd. Maria. But the prophecies are not so totally destitute of regularity in some respects. In those which relate especially to our Lord there is some order preserved, for they proceed from general intimations to more de¬ tailed predictions. Edward. Does not this, however, show more of arti¬ fice than any thing else ? Why should not the earlier prophets have declared all particulars as explicitly as those of later date ? Mr. B. I do not profess to answer all your whys and wherefores, as we did not take this subject for the sake of showing how ingeniously we might argue for and against it. Your present objection can only have weight where it might be inferred, that proximity in time would enable a person to see more clearly the probabilities of future events. In the case of the predictions of Scrip¬ ture, the latest prophet, Malachi, could have no advan¬ tages over his brethren, as to the prophecies which he delivered. The events were as improbable and as un¬ foreseen at a distance of four hundred years as four thousand. Maria. But cannot some reason be assigned for this progression in the information given by prophecy ? Mr. B. There can. It would have been absurd for Moses to have prophesied of our Lord’s coming- to the second Temple, when neither the first nor the second had existed. What interest would such a prophecy have had to the Israelites in the wilderness ? What influence 31 What is said by Mr. B. to be folly and absurd in us!—32 How does Maria speak of the order of the prophecies'?—33 Edward asks why the earlier prophets did not declare all particulars as explicitly as did those of a later date—what is the answer to this?—34 What inquiry is made by Maria as to the progression?—35 What answer is given her by Mr. B.? 228 CONVERSATIONS ON THE would it have on their conduct ? The propnecy when addressed by Malachi to the desponding Jews, who mourned the inferiority of the second Temple to the first, had the greatest force. It was sufficient to our first parents to know that a Saviour should arise; it was peculiarly encouraging to Abraham to know that the Saviour was fo arise from him; but reverse these, and you altogether destroy their effect, as first delivered. Maria. In considering the subjects of the prophecies, delivered at various times, there must then be a refer¬ ence to those to whom they were addressed ? Mr. B. Unquestionably: for the prophecies were not delivered to be shut up from the public eye, as the books of the Sibyl were at Rome: they were given for the comfort, the encouragement, and admonishing of the people; they are connected with the most solemn en¬ treaties to repentance, faith, or holiness of life; and were adapted to the peculiar characters of those whom they addressed, or the circumstances in which they were placed. Edxoard. Are we, then, to examine the predictions of each prophet separately from those of the rest ? Mr. B. By no means: we may so far examine and compare the words of each as to fix in what sense he used them; but we must on no account be contented with this; for it is directly opposed to the admonition which precedes the passage I quoted from St. Peter— “ Knowing that no prophecy is of any private interpre¬ tation.” If the Scriptures had proceeded from various individuals without divine agency, we ought to have re¬ spect principally to the ideas of each independently of the rest; but when we are assured that they were alike the agents of the one and the same Holy Spirit in this matter, we must ascertain the meaning of the divine Author by a reference to the ivhole of his works. Edward. It is not, however, conceived, I believe, 36 Was it necessary, that in giving the prophecies, there should be a reference to those to whom they were addiessed'?—37 Why was it neces¬ sary 1 ?—38 Are we then to examine the predictions of each prophet sep¬ arately from those of the rest?—39 How are we to examine them 1 !—4ft How are we to ascertain the meaning of the divine author 1 ? EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 229 that the Holy Spirit so influenced the prophets as to de¬ prive them of their ordinary faculties, or supersede their natural abilities. Mr. B. If this had been the case, the evidence for the Scriptures would have been materially weakened. We should have lost all power of arguing from them as independent witnesses, where historical records failed. All that is implied in this divine agency on the mind, only affects the facts of what were delivered. The im¬ pression of these was imprinted upon the mind with the greatest certainty, but each communicated that im¬ pression to others by the natural means peculiar to him¬ self. The difference of style in Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel, mark these prophets clearly as distinct men: but the sameness of the subject'(taking the word in an extended sense) as clearly decides the sameness of the Spirit which revealed the future to all. Maria. There is, however, in all a very high style of language, and extraordinary greatness of thought. Mr. B. This most probably is owing to the grandeur of the subjects on which they treated, and the impression necessarily made upon their minds by the very nature of heavenly communications. They to whom the al¬ mighty Creator and Governor of all things revealed his will, could not write of him so unworthily as others, not blessed with similar communications, would be liable to do. Edward. From what has been said, it would appear that we may regard the prophecies in two ways, either with reference to those in whose time they were deliv¬ ered, or with respect to those in whose time they were to be fulfilled. Mr. B. And even beyond this it may occasionally be useful to review them as affecting all who lived after the time of their delivery, and before their fulfilment, and as affecting all who lived after the last-mentioned period. 41 Were the prophets so influenced by the Holy Spirit, as to have been deprived of the use of their ordinary faculties’—42 How were they influ¬ enced!—43 How is this illustrated by reference to Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel!—44 To what is to be ascribed the elevated style of language in all the prophets!—45 What are the two ways in which Edward says the prophecies may be regarded!—46 Beyond this, what may be useful! 20 230 CONVERSATIONS ON THE The two classes you mentioned are indeed those to whom they were more directly addressed; but it appears clear that they were intended also for the use of the other two, very nearly if not altogether, to as great an extent. It is not merely in the very words of the prediction itself that we perceive the spirit of prophecy; in the very fact of its being given at all, we may sometimes trace the divine Mind, foreseeing what would be necessary for the comfort and support of his people in after times, when the prophet slumbered in the dust. This also became in some measure necessary, in consequence of limits hav¬ ing been put to the duration of their heavenly communi¬ cations. Several of the admonitions and cautions of the apostles seem decidedly of a prospective nature; and in other cases, where some ground for express precepts may have existed, it is by no means improbable that they were given more with reference to the future than the present need of the church. Maria. This also ought to be the character of a reve¬ lation of this nature, that it should foresee and provide for contingencies. Edward. It is from the want of this knowledge, among other things, that we infer the falsity of Mahometanism; for the proof depended upon continued success, and suc¬ cess involved the impossibility of the observance of some of its precepts. Maria. Yet if that had not been the case, we could not have inferred the truth of the religion, since human foresight, unaided by divine inspiration, could have guarded against such a conclusion. Mr. B. But human foresight alone could not have suggested the predictions of St. Paul, in his Second Epistle to the Thessalonians; and the precepts in that to the Colossians appear of a nature so interesting to the universal church in after ages, that it is not unreason¬ able to suppose St. Paul must have foreseen the univer- 47 How are we able to perceive the spirit of prophecy 1 ?—48 What is said of several of the admonitions and cautions of the apostles'?—49 How do we infer the falsity of Mahometanism'?—50 What is said of the pre¬ dictions of St. Paul, in his second epistle to the Thessalonians—also of his precepts to the Colossians'? EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 231 sal circulation of that Epistle, and had respect to the errors of much larger bodies of professing Christians than were likely at that time to disturb the little commu¬ nity at Colosse. It is also important to observe, that the predictions which relate to future corruptions in the church, and the precepts which appear to have reference to them, could never be the occasion of their own ful¬ filment. No one would willingly take upon himself the apostolic anathema; no body of men could desire to render themselves liable to it, or so act as to compel others to fulfil predictions of so fatal a pature. Edward. Are not many of the prophecies supposed to have double fulfilments? Mr. B. The existence of a secondary fulfilment of prophecy is a point of great difficulty to decide with certainty. That two events may possibly fulfil the same prediction (particularly if couched in general terms) may be granted; but that it was intended that both should fulfil it, can only be established by strong evidence; and though mr.ny circumstances may render this probable, I am not aware of such evidence having actually been adduced. In some cases it is also not improbable, that the writers of the New Testament quoted the words of a prophecy, which was known to have been fulfilled at an earlier period, only as an illustration of a later event, as they appear occasionally to use other parts of the sacred writings in a similar way. In so doing, they could not be misunderstood by those to whom they wrote; and we must not therefore hastily deem them “ inconclusive rea- soners” for adopting the method of argument most popu¬ lar with those whom they thus addressed. Maria. No conclusive argument, then, can be drawn from their quotations of this nature in favour of the dou¬ ble sense ? Mr. B. I think not; but upon this point I would speak with diffidence. The consideration of it is not essential 51 What is important to be observed in relation to these predictions'?— 52 What does Mr. B. say of a secondary fulfilment to prophecy?—53 How is it not improbable that the writers of the New Testament, in some cases, quoted the words of a prophecy?—54 How does Mr. B. think that we should speak of this mode of reasoning by the sacred writers? 232 CONVERSATIONS ON THE to the argument as to the truth of Christianity; and as such, I shall only refer you to the works of Warburton and Marsh,—the former in defence of the secondary sense, and the latter against it. “For, let the result of an inquiry into secondary senses be what it will, the prophecies which testify of Christ, according to their primary sense, are sufficiently numerous to supply us with arguments for the truth of our religion.”— Marsh's Lectures, xxii. p. 61 . Having mentioned the name of Warburton, it would be very negligent in me were I not to press upon you, if your minds are in any respect unsatisfied as to the subject, by no means to omit the perusal of the sermons preached at the lecture founded by that great scholar expressly for this subject. Perhaps few institutions have been more fortunate in a succession of able men; and you will find in their works not less learning than strong argument blended with piety. Edward. There have been a great number of publi¬ cations on the book of Revelation; but I believe there is little agreement. Do you consider this as a serious objection ? Mr. B. It has been considered by Michaelis as an objection against the book itself; but if you read his remarks upon it, you should also examine the arguments of Dr. Woodhouse in its defence. It is not at all sur¬ prising that difference of opinion 'should exist upon this subject, when the figurative language in which it is couched, together with great part of it being yet unful¬ filled, is duly considered. It is confessedly the most difficult portion of the prophetical records, and has had in consequence the greatest number of commentators. That out of so many, much nonsense should have been produced, is not at all surprising to any who remember, that “ Fools rush in, where angels fear to tread:” 55 What is said of it by Marsht—56 What does Mr. B. say of Marsh’s sermons on this subject'!—5.7 W.hat writer is named, who objects to the book of Revelation on the grounds here mentioned 1 ?—58 What author is also recommended as having written in its defence'?—59 What confession is made among commentators respecting this book? EVIDENCES OP CHJRLSTUNITV. 233 but it would be no great proof of wisdom on that ac¬ count to discard from consideration the works of sober and learned men, more anxious to follow the guidance of Scripture, than to claim an office not much lower than that of the prophet himself, as some have done, in expanding obscure intimations into detailed predictions of events yet in the womb of time. Edward. The Apocalypse carries on the declarations of prophecy to the end of the world; so that we have now a complete chain of evidence of this nature, from the fall of man to his final judgment. It surely is a strong argument for Christianity, that not one link of this chain should have been broken. Maria. When I consider the chances that must have happened in every age, the number of particulars in which it was exposed to danger, and the number of enemies who would gladly have detected a failure, it appears to me that a special providence has watched over it. Mr. B. I feel confident, that the more you examine this subject, the firmer will be your conviction upon it. I have generally observed that those who have had the least confidence in it, argued from theory rather than examination. Now there are few subjects in which the¬ ory, unaccompanied by examination, is more apt to mis¬ lead; and it never surprises me, therefore, to find such persons speaking of it as unsatisfactory. It is very much to be wished, that those who doubt upon the subject should seriously account for the facts of the case, go into the detail, and trace up the phenomena to some other cause, if they have not a divine origin. When the prob¬ abilities come to be compared between the believer’s account and that of the sceptic, I have no doubt the lat¬ ter would not be very ambitious to transmit them to pos¬ terity side by side. 60 What does Mr. B. say is not surprising in relation to it, and would be in us no proof of wisdom'!—61 How far are carried forward the declar¬ ations in the apocalypse!—62 Of what does Mr. B. feel very confident”!— 63 What does he say, in the conclusion of the conversation, as much to fee desired 1 20* 234 CONVERSATIONS ON THE CONVERSATION XVI. Mr. B. In the evidence of miracles and prophecy, we have such strong attestations to the truth of Christianity, that it perhaps is not easy to add any thing which shall not appear weak in comparison; but there are yet some considerations of great importance, as confirming their evidence, and as affording additional reason to believe, “ive have not folloived cunningly devised fables.” That which I shall now bring before you is the evidence af¬ forded that Christianity is the one dispensation for which all others were preparatory, and which shall last to the end of time. • Edward. That this may be the case is exceedingly probable from what we have already seen; but it will greatly strengthen my conviction if established, as over¬ throwing the infidel objection that a revelation should be for all ages. Mr. B. That the Bible clearly states the dependence of each dispensation of Divine Providence upon that which preceded it, must be admitted by every one who reads it; and he who does not read it can have no claim for an answer to an objection founded upon wilful igno¬ rance. It may, however, be useful to recall to your minds some of the leading facts. Of the first dispensation under which man was placed we know little; nor is it of importance to the proof of the truth of Christianity that we should know more, since the necessity for that revelation only arose from the abrupt termination of the happiness of our first parents in Para¬ dise, by the fall. From the fall to the time of Abraham, we find no es¬ pecial provision made for the securing the continuance of religion upon the earth, beyond the occasional exer¬ tions of some zealous servants of God. Man appears to have been left in a great measure to develope his own 1 What does Mr. B. say it is not easy to dot—2 But what does he now propose doing?—3 What does the Bible clearly state 1 ?—4 What does he say of the knowledge we possess of the first dispensation 1 ?—5 What were the provisions for religion from the fall to the time of Abraham 1 ? EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 235 powers and dispositions during a period of about one third the whole time that has elapsed since the fall. Maria. The consequence we know was most fatal to the interests of mankind, as well as of religion; for the “whole earth was full of violence, and the imaginations of the heart of man were only evil, and that continually.” Mr. B. That this statement is correct, all the light which remote antiquity can afford seems to testify; the general tradition appearing to have been, that man dete¬ riorated from bad to worse. The general experience of mankind seems to testify that man is unable to live in society without religion. When the worship of the true God was lost, it therefore became necessary to supply its place. We have not time to enter into an inquiry as to the origin of Pagan idolatry; I only refer to it now, as affording a sufficient reason for the separation of Abra¬ ham from his country. Experience had already shown to the world (and it was to the world that it was necessa¬ ry this fact should be shown,) that the tendency of man was to forsake God. If the patriarchal dispensation did not prove the forbearance of God, and the fallen state of man, I know not what could prove them. Those who object to the length of time which had elapsed before our Lord’s coming into the world, must at least give up the objection against the forbearance of God, as described in the Old Testament. We know from the history of the world in subsequent periods, what could be effected by man when advancing from a state of barbarism, and cer¬ tainly have a right to argue from the ordinary develop¬ ment of the human powers in society, that at the call of Abraham a very different state of things ought to have existed from that which in fact did exist. Edward. This shows that the call of Abraham was not premature, but that full time had been given as a state of trial in this dispensation. Mr. B. All experience proved that there was no human probability of religion being preserved without express 6 How was the character and the condition of man affected by this want 6 7 !— 7 Why was Abraham separated from his country 7 ?—8 What did the patriarchal dispensation prove 7 ?—9 What do we know from the history of the world in subsequent periods?—10 What does all experience prove? 236 CONVERSATIONS ON THE revelation and a new dispensation: these were according¬ ly given. I would now ask, what conld be better calcu¬ lated to secure the great purposes which then became more fully developed in prophecy, than the situation in which Abraham and his descendants were placed, the life they were required to lead, and the promises given unto them? Maria. But even among them there was no small ten¬ dency to imitate the evil deeds of those around them. Mr. B. True, and mark the next step. By a series of circumstances in which the finger of God is most plain¬ ly perceptible, and which must have produced a strong impression at the time among them, we find them fixed in Egypt, then certainly inferior to no country in the world, either as to riches or advancement in arts and sciences. By their observance of the worship and insti¬ tutes of God they continue a separate people; as such they excite the jealousy of the king and nation—are ex¬ posed to persecution—they cry for help to the God of their fathers, and are delivered. Maria. Up to the moment of their deliverance our pity is certainly excited for the Israelites; but after that we look upon them as the injurers rather than the injured. Mr. B. But in all these transactions we still see the agreement of the providence of God with the declarations of his word—we see a marked design of giving the na¬ tions every chance for repentance. The Israelites went down into Egypt with all the advantages that the suc¬ cessful administration of Joseph could secure; they went down too few in number to alarm the people; they were regarded as the conferers of benefits; and they carried with them the knowledge of the one true God. After a residence of two hundred years, we find no impression made upon Egyptian idolatry; even a succession of heavy judgments only affecting them for the time during which they were operating: and the very earliest ac- 11 What question does Mr. B. ask respecting’ Abraham and his de¬ scendants!—12 What is said of their being planted in Egypt!—13 What may we see in the transactions to which Maria has alluded!—14 How was the religious character of the Egyptians by the long residence of the Isra¬ elites among them! EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 237 counts wo have of this country from Pagan writers, re¬ present it as the very hotbed of the most monstrous su¬ perstitions. ' Edward. And if this was the first of nations, what must the worst have been? Mr. B. To this degraded state had the world then sunk; from this it had to be rescued; from the consequences also of guilt like this was salvation requisite. A Sa¬ viour had been promised; but how could he appear when the world was in such a state? As a long series of years had been granted to “ prove what was in man,” a consid¬ erable time was necessary to prepare the world for the salvation which experience had shown to be so absolutely necessary. The salvation to be effected was of the high¬ est kind, and it became therefore necessary to show that it was such by corresponding preparation. Maria. And that preparation was, I suppose, afford¬ ed in the Jewish Theocracy, and the dispensation of the law of Moses. “ The law ivas our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ .” Mr. B. It was so; and when you next read the Pen¬ tateuch, mark with what care it was drawn up for that purpose. The great truths of natural religion were now confirmed and strengthened; a definite law was added, and a special providence connected with its observance; a better covenant intimated, and a greater prophet than Moses promised. On every side the Israelite saw the hand of God present: the divine voice was ever sound¬ ing in his ears; he could not escape from the knowledge of God. Yet of how singular a nature was the knowl¬ edge thus given—the mercy of God so abundant, his justice so rigid, his holiness so intense! Again, their connexion with him was no less singular; the highest blessings and most terrible curses suspended over them; the most singular injunctions, with promises connected 15 What question is asked respecting the moral state of the world at this timet—16 How does Mr. B. reply to him'?—17 In what manner does Maria suppose that the preparation for the gospel dispensation was afford¬ ed?—18 What will be observed from an attentive examination of the Pen¬ tateuch'?—19 What appears wonderfully singular in the relation of this people to the Supreme Being! 1 238 CONVERSATIONS ON THE with them equally strange; commands utterly to destroy the wicked inhabitants of Canaan, with the fearful warn¬ ing that the same doom would be theirs, if they followed their example; the gift of a kingdom, with the incessant admonition that it only became theirs on account of the wickedness of the inhabitants, and not for any merit in themselves; precepts of the most terrible rigour as to their conduct towards man, with others of the most ten¬ der care, even for animals; and yet these again sacri¬ ficed in profusion to a God whose tender mercies were over all his works. Edward. This appears a strange mixture. Mr. B. Yet, taken with reference only to itself, it was of the greatest consequence in preparing this people to become the depositories of the will of God till the prom¬ ised Saviour came, and, when explained by the New Testament, furnishes abundant proof of “ the manifold wisdom of God.” It was only by the most severe judgments that this people could be kept in the service of God. They were taught, first, by the most terrible examples of the ruin of others, and, secondly, by their own sufferings, the truth and certainty of the commandments of God. So far as common life was concerned, their law is admira¬ ble for its justice, its benevolence, and its anxious care for the welfare of each; but all was to give place to this first and great commandment,—“ Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy sold, and with all thy strength —and it was only where this was ob¬ served, that the second followed, which however was then equally to be obeyed,—“ Thou shalt love thy neigh - hour as thyself.” It is not easy to conceive of any method likely to be more effectual in impressing the mind with the strictness and extent of the commands of God, and of the necessity of observing them. Maria. The whole character of the Old Testament has always struck me as that of excessive strictness. 20 When all this was taken in reference to itself, how does it appear? —21 How only could this people be kept in the service of God?—22 What is said of their law, and to what was it to give place?—23 Of what de¬ gree of value is the system of moral instruction in the gospel? EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 239 Mr. B. That the establishment of the Israelites in Ca¬ naan, and their subsequent preservation, must have had a most powerful effect in restoring and preserving the knowledge of the true God, cannot be doubted, though we are not able, from the length of time which has since elapsed, to ascertain the extent to which this was carried. With regard to other nations, we find their knowledge of the divine unity generally to be traced to the vicinity of this nation; and where we inquire among nations that decidedly had no connexion with them, we find nothing but the most disgusting superstitions. Edward. These circumstances strongly corroborate the Scripture statements, and equally show the necessity of securing the continuance of some knowledge of God till such time as a revelation capable of universal dissem¬ ination could be established. Mr. B. We must now turn our attention to some things more immediately connected with that revelation, and without which no reasonable conjecture can be formed for their institution. Besides the moral law, we have another, the Levitical or ceremonial law, containing such an immense number of observances, that at first we can hardly fix our attention even on the more prominent parts, so as to inquire for what purpose they could be enjoined. Edward. It does indeed appear strange, that in the same work we should find such high ideas of God incul¬ cated, with such trifling regulations for his worship, and such an incessant flow of blood to Him who was the Cre¬ ator of all. Mr. B. But if you turn to the Epistle to the Hebrews, you will see sufficient reason given for all this: you there find that all had an object; that all was designed to lead to just conclusions on the nature of God, the situation of man, the guilt of sin, the necessity of atonement, of a Mediator betwixt God and man, of purity of heart, and devotion to God. 24 What are the remarks of Mr. B. on the establishment of the Israel- ites in Canaan 1—25 What does Edward say of the circumstances con¬ nected with that establishment!—26 To what does Mr. B. now propose to turn the attention!—27 What appears strange to Edward!—28 What reasons are given for this in the epistle to the Hebrews' 1 240 CONVERSATIONS ON THE Mana. And we have a right to regard the explanation of the New Testament as just, from the performance of the miracles, and the fulfilment of the prophecies. Mr. B. Taken separately from the New Testament, to us, living at this period, with the history of the world before us, the whole would become absurd; but when we view it only as the type of a better dispensation which was to follow, its insertion becomes highly expedient, if not absolutely necessary. The true Israelite, who look¬ ed beyond the types and shadows of ritual observance to the great sacrifice hereafter to be offered for sin, would, though thankful for the light thus afforded him, rejoice that the time approached when this'“ heavy yoke” would be exchanged for the liberty with which the Messias would make him free. Maria. This closely connects the two Testaments to¬ gether, and makes them, strictly speaking, only parts of one revelation. Mr. B. Nor is this all; for not only do the positive or¬ dinances of God appear as types of better things to come, —even some historical facts must be admitted in a simi¬ lar manner. The deliverance from Egypt, the Passover, the passage through the Red Sea, the wanderings in the wilderness, the rest in Canaan, correspond too closely with higher things in the Christian dispensation, for us not to acknowledge the hand of Providence as prefigur¬ ing in these greater mercies. Maria. They form a kind of prophecy in actions, as others are in words. Mr. B. But all this manifests a deliberate course of proceedings, a regular plan laid down and acted upon from the beginning, and that which explains the whole cannot therefore be treated as if it were a thing unheard of before, for ages. Edward. Yet some write as if Christianity appeared 1800 years ago, wholly without expectation, having no foundation in any thing before. 29 How would the Levitical law appear to us taken separately from the New Testament?—30 What is said of the true Israelite'?—31 What his¬ torical facts are named as possessing a typical character'!—32 What does ^ Mr. B. say of all this!—33 How does Edward say that some appear to view Christianity 1 EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 241 Mr. B. But in all we have hitherto considered, we find a constant reference to something which preceded and something which followed. If in Abraham all nations of the earth were to be blessed, it was because from him should spring that seed of the woman which should bruise the serpent’s head; and therefore to his seed should the land of Canaan be given, that he might spring there from the tribe of Judah. Thus also advancing further, we find every thing still arranged with reference to some succeeding revelation, as well as that which preceded it, and thereby the whole is strictly connected together.' In every stage we find the same efforts to impress upon the minds of the people the necessity for the salvation hereafter to be wrought, its magnitude, and the consequences which should result from it. The feelings of the Jews, as a nation, were inte¬ rested by the promise, that from them the Messias should spring; a succession of heavy judgments at length had the effect of eradicating idolatry; the great chages in which the mightiest empires on every side of them were overthrown, were so over-ruled by Divine Providence, that they remained a separate people in their own land. Edward. It is singular that the ten tribes should have been utterly ruined when carried away captive, whilst the rest were brought back to their own country, and were enabled to rebuild their Temple, and observe the Mosaical law. Mr. B. The history of the East during that period, from the light thrown upon it by revelation, becomes more in¬ teresting and important than we otherwise could have imagined. In seeing such men as Nebuchadnezzar and Cyrus, whilst overcrowing empires,, only fulfilling the designs of Providence, we are led to form correct ideas of the nature of the divine government, and duly to ap¬ preciate that kingdom which the Lord was about to set up, and for which all these were but preparatory. 34 What is said of the relation in which Abraham stood to the nations of the earth'?—35 In advancing; further, what do we find 1 ?—36 By what means were the Jews to continue a distinct people in their own land!—37 What is considered singular by Edward relating to the ten tribes'?—38 What is said of the history of the East!—39 What is stated in connexion with the names of Nebuchadnezzar aii(i Cyrus'? 21 242 CONVERSATIONS ON THE Maria. The accomplishment of many of the prophecies having taken place during these times; must have con¬ tributed to impress the minds of the Israelites with a due sense of the divine attributes, and of the necessity of im¬ plicit obedience to the will of God. Mr. B. And hence the sneer of Gibbon appears as weak as it is malicious. Without fairly meeting the question, he insinuates, that there is little reason to believe in the miracles of the Old Testament, because it is only in later times that the Jews have been free from idolatry. But effects cannot take place before their causes have ope¬ rated ; and who that considers the state of the wor d in those times, the “ mixed multitude”^ that came out of Egypt, and their situation in Canaan, can be surprised that they were at times seduced into idolatry. Like all other nations, they were naturally prone to idolatry; all others but themselves were idolaters: the idea of nation¬ al and local deities was at that time universally preva¬ lent. They had true miracles; but others had what to many must have appeared true miracles also: the law of God ran counter to the spirit of the people; and is it then to be wondered at, that though many miracles wrought among them proved “the Lord to be God,” an ignorant people should not immediately perceive, that there was only this one God, and that “ him only must they serve,” although he had declared it? Maria. It required a considerable time to convince them of these great truths; but when once convinced, they retained them most firmly. Mr. B. There' is an error very common among many modern writers, of reasoning upon facts, as if the same light and knowledge existed formerly which does at present; of taking it for granted, that, in the earliest times, whole nations would draw conclusions as soberly and logically as they may do in their closets. But ex¬ perience must decide; and I do not think it would be 40 How does Maria think the minds of the Israelites became impressed with a sense of the divine attributes'?—41 Of Gibbon, what is said?—42 What comparison is made between the Israelites and idolatrous nations on the subject of religion?—43 What error is named as common among modern writers?—44 What does Mr. B. think might be easily proved? EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 243 necessary to. travel out of our own times for abundant proofs of the proneness of human nature to lower the divine authority and the demands of religion, and of its willingness to take the most inconclusive evidence in favour of what agreed with its wishes. Edward. When the miracles were wrought before their eyes, the effect upon them seems fully answerable to our expectations; as at the deliverance from Pharaoh in the Red Sea: when Elijah -called down fire from heaven, the people cried, “ The Lord he is the God, the Lord he is the God.” Mr. B. The evidence afforded by a special providence was necessarily interrupted when the Jews ceased to observe the commandments; and then it was that pro¬ phecy became more abundant. The grand question at issue, viz. whether the God of the Jews was the only real God, was put upon the accomplishment of prophe¬ cies, which were made so definite and detailed* that there was no escaping from some conclusion, for or against them. Now what was the consequence ?—nothing less than the extirpation of idolatry among the people. Our conclusion, therefore, must be, that the people saw with their own eyes the prophecies fulfilled; they felt that it was in vain to fight against God; they saw no God of any other nation had delivered his votaries; and there¬ fore had the fullest conviction, that such were only the creatures of the imagination, or literally the works of men’s hands. Edward. All history seems • calculated to. give the idea, that just views of God and of his service are but slowly embraced by the bulk of mankind. Mr. B. And the cause is not far removed; for, so far as the intellect only is concerned, we ever see persons stopping at second causes, or having recourse to some occult quality, the existence of which can neither be 45 What instances of miracles are named by Edward, which appeared to produce on that people a full effect?—46 On what occasion did proph¬ ecy become more abundant?—47 What was the grand question at issue? —48 How does Edward think that history will teach us in regard to the progress in the world of just views of God and his service?—49 What does Mr. B. say of the intellect and the heart of man, so far as religion is con¬ cerned? 244 CONVERSATIONS ON THE proved nor disproved. With respect to the heart, I think no one can doubt, that, naturally, all men seek to make ther religion such as will favour their own inclinations. Maria. Of the infinite importance of truth, no one doubts in theory; but every day’s experience shows how little it is regarded in practice. Mr. B. The Jews, when once fixed in their religion, became bigots, and sought only, whilst retaining the great leading truths, to make it speak the language most agreeable to themselves. Any doubt as to idolatry was altogether out of the question; that the Lord Only was God could not be doubted; but by keeping out of view the fact that He was “ a Spirit, and required those who worshipped him, to do it in spirit and in truth,” they contrived to retain every outward observance of respect, with little or no regard to higher duties. Edxvard. It was in this state that they were found by our Lord, who, by rebuking them for having “ made the Word of God of none effect,” drew upon himself the hatred of those “ who loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.” Mr. B. If no period had elapsed sufficient to develope this general corruption of the Jewish nation, hew much should we have wanted of the instruction of our Lord, which was called forth by the state in which he found them ! This instruction, you will also observe, is not merely applicable to the circumstances of the Jews, but becomes very important to the church itself, in later times, for its own use. The same endeavour to escape from moral obligation, which made the Jews seek to merge the whole of religion in ritual observances, has subsequently prevailed in a very large portion of the Christian church, and with as pernicious effects. In¬ deed, “there is nothing new under the sun;” human nature is ever developing the same propensities in differ¬ ent ways, as modified by changes of situation, manners, 50 Into what inconsistency did the Jews run in relation to the worship of God!—51 What was their state when our Lord appeared upon earth, and how did he reprove them!—52 What advantages do we derive from their being in sucli a state!—53 What analogy is there between the con¬ duct of professed Christians and the ancient Jews in one particular here named! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 245 and attainments, but the principle is the same in all ages, and under all circumstances. Edward. Our Lord, however, appeared at a period so far advanced, as to have developed those modes of con¬ duct ; and in the Gospel we are furnished with the best preservative against similar errors. Mr. B. On reviewing the whole plan of redemption as displayed in the Holy Scriptures, connecting the Old and New Testaments with eaclf other, it appears in all respects worthy of God. Every portion of it will, on such a survey, be found in its proper place, requisite for some beneficial purpose, and sufficient to the accom¬ plishment of that for which it was designed. The Bible discloses a more magnificent display of the government of the great Creator of all things, than we could possibly have imagined, had we been destitute of this light. Maria. And what additional interest is thereby given to religion, when we see all things regulated with a re¬ gard to the improvement of man by its means ! Mr. B. The rise and fall of empires two or three thousand years ago, is indeed to us a matter of little con¬ sequence; but of what infinite importance it is to us, that, during, the political convulsions which attended them, mankind were placed in a state of moral disci¬ pline, by which they were trained to be in a fit state to receive that Gospel which was able to make them wise unto salvation ! Even in the' eyes of an enlightened Deist, the fixing the religion of a nation on the belief of one God, by whatever, means effected, must appear of incalculable importance to the human race. They who are indifferent to revealed religion, acknowledge the benefit conferred on Europe by the Reformation, how¬ ever they may lament peculiar circumstances connected with it. Upon the same principle that partial and tem¬ porary evils, in this case, are overlooked for the sake of universal and permanent good, we ought to argue with 54 What difference is there between our own situation, in the particu¬ lar named, and that of the Jews at the time of our Lord’s appearance 1 ?— 55 If we review the whole plan of redemption, what will be the result 1 ?— 56 What does the Bible disclose 1 ?—57 In the rise and fall of empires, two or three thousand years ago, what does Mr. B. say is most important 1 ?— 68 How does he say that enlightened deists ought to view this subject! 246 CONVERSATIONS ON THE respect to the evpnts which led to the firm establishment of the religion delivered by Moses. Edward. The case was desperate, and called for des¬ perate remedies. Mr. B. But those remedies were administered by In¬ finite Wisdom, which knew how to make even the wrath of man work to his praise, and to restrain its excess. With regard to the severe judgments which attended the Mosaic dispensation, the only real difficulty which appears to me existing, is the impression which might have been made on the minds of the Canaanites and other nations, by seeing such a people as. the Israelites so highly favoured by Heaven. Edward. The Israelites themselves could not be igno¬ rant that it was only on account of the wickedness of these nations that they were commanded to destroy them; this being often and emphatically repeated in their law, and their own sins as strongly reprobated. Maria. But the Canaanites, who were destroyed with¬ out mercy, could hardly have comprehended the reason of this; they could only look upon the Israelites as rob¬ bers. Mr. B. Putting religion out of the question, no more objection lies against the invasion of Canaan than any other invasion. In those countries, and in those times, robbery and oppression were alike common to all; so that I do not apprehend the Canaanites, who knew no¬ thing of the religion of the Jews (if such there were), regarded the matter in any other light than a common war. They would have been equally ready to spoil and plunder others, had they had the power. Some of their kings had already given pretty convincing proofs of their disposition in this way. Maria. But it is in seeing the spoiling of the country sanctioned by God that the difficulty consists* 59 Edward remarks that the case was desperate, and required desperate remedies—what is the reply of Mr. B. to him'?—60 What does he say is the only real difficulty in regard to the severe judgments which attended the Mosaic dispensation!—61 How does Edward suppose the Israelites must have viewed those judgments'?—62 What does Mr. B. say of the in¬ vasion of ancient Canaan by the Jews'?—63 In what does Maria think the difficulty of this case consists'! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 247 Mr. B. Those who were acquainted with the Jewish religion, must have known that all those who came up with the descendants of Israel from Egypt were not of the seed of Abraham. It could have been no difficult matter for individuals who truly abhorred the cruel and abominable superstitions of Canaan, to have united them¬ selves to them. Some actually did so. There was de¬ cisive evidence against the religion of Canaan in itself; there was decisive evidence for the religion of the Jews in their miraculous deliverance from Egypt, and preser¬ vation in the desert. Maria. The passage of the Jordan, and the fall of the walls of Jericho, were, at least, a solemn warning to the whole nation of the consequences which must ensue upon any opposition to the God of Israel: they must have known they were fighting against God. Mr. B. They must also have known that God was justly displeased at them, nor can I think they were ig¬ norant that he was yet of great mercy; but their sins were, in fact, such that they were not fit to live. The attack of the Israelites was to them what the fire from heaven had been to the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah It was announced as such; it was received as such; it was regarded by others as such. They knew they were guilty; and such as despaired of mercy from heaven re¬ sisted and perished.* Edward. As to the possession of the country, they had only held it before by permission from God; and at a time when he openly resumed his own, on account of their having forsaken him, it seems absurd to consider the Israelites as mere robbers and plunderers. Mr. B. They acted under a special dispensation: the finger of God was manifest in the whole proceeding. The heavy doom which came upon them can only prove, that the worship and service of God is a matter of much 64 How does Mr. B. reply to her?—65 What comparison does he make between the religion of the Jews and that of Canaan'!—66 To what mira¬ cles does Maria allude, and how does she say they must have been viewed 1 ? _67 How must the Canaanites have viewed the calamities which came upon them?—68 In what manner does Edward say that they themselves had held the country?—69 How is the conduct of the Israelites to be viewed in the agency which they performed in these transactional 248 CONVERSATIONS ON THE more importance than some would persuade us. The same truth was afterwards as fully declared in the pun¬ ishment of the Israelites, so that there is no such thing as the partiality which infidels would persuade us exists. The Israelites served the purpose for which they were separated from other nations, probably as well as any other people would have done. In the nature of things, general laws may press hard upon particular individuals; but when we see God invariably apportioning to nations the results due by general laws to their conduct as na¬ tions, and yet know, that in every nation he that “ fear- eth him, arid worketh righteousness, is accepted of him,” and that hereafter every man shall receive according to his works,—we must confess that the judgment of God is according to truth. CONVERSATION XYII Mr. B. All the previous dispensations had been lim¬ ited as to their nature and extent, had reference to local and temporary circumstances, and were supported by means of a similar kind. Christianity, however, was designed to go far beyond these; it was to be that in which the knowledge of the Lord should cover the earth as the waters cover the sea; it was designed to last for ever; of this kingdom there was to be no end. The objects to which it was directed were of a higher kind, and the means by which it was to prevail were to be such as should alike endure through all time, and in all countries. Edward. But this involves several important questions. Is it certain that Christianity not only professes to be of 70 How may we be enabled, in this and in all similar cases, to see and know that God judges according to truth 1 1 What is said of the nature of the institutions of religion, which exist¬ ed prior to Christianity!—2 What is said of Christianity by way of con¬ trast! EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 249 this nature, but is also capable of universal reception an